Israel's Jewish Nation State Law can't be a departure from the democratic principles it was founded on for the simple reason that it wasn't founded on any.
On July 19, the Israeli legislature, the Knesset, passed a law defining Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, prompting criticism in the US mainstream media that it represents a departure from the democratic principles Israel was founded upon.
The reality is that the Jewish Nation State Law can’t represent a departure from democratic principles for the simple reason that Israel owes its very existence to a fundamental rejection of democracy.
The “Jewish State” of Israel was established through two profound manifestations of that rejectionism: the League of Nations’ Palestine Mandate and the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
A brief review of the historical record shows how, if Israel practiced democracy, it would be called Palestine. Hence the necessity for the Jewish Nation State Law.
The Zionist Mandate for Palestine
During the First World War, Great Britain came to militarily occupy Palestine and promised the Arabs their independence in exchange for a commitment to join in the war effort against the Ottoman Empire. Although they did not rise up en masse against their Ottoman rulers, Arabs from Palestine were among the first to volunteer to fight with the British in order to gain their freedom from Turkish rule.
However, the British government never had any intention of honoring its promise to support independence for the Arab inhabitants of Palestine. Instead, their aim was to prevent the Palestinians from exercising their right to self-determination in service to the Zionist leadership in Europe, a quid pro quo for Jewish support for the war effort.
The infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917, delivered in the form of a private letter from Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild, a representative of the Zionist movement and member of the renowned banking family, was a propaganda document designed for the purpose of acquiring Jewish support for the war.
It promised British support “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” while paying meaningless lip service to “the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” in order to ensure that the Declaration did not undermine the government’s need to also acquire support from Arab rulers.
Established in the wake of the war, the League of Nations issued its “Mandate” for Palestine, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration and was drafted by organized Zionists to further the aim of reconstituting Arab Palestine into a “Jewish state”.
The purpose of the Mandate, enforced by British guns, was to deny democratic self-governance to the inhabitants of Palestine until the Jews had through mass immigration managed to establish a numerical majority.
However, by the end of the Mandate, Jews still remained a minority, comprising about a third of the population. Moreover, despite the best efforts of the Zionist leadership, the Jewish community had only managed to purchase about 7 percent of the land in Palestine. Arabs owned more land than Jews in every single district in Palestine, including Jaffa, which included the main Jewish population center of Tel Aviv.
The reality of demographics and land ownership posed a problem for the Zionist leadership. The Arabs rejected the Mandate and were giving the British trouble. They recognized that the Zionists envisioned their political disenfranchisement and eventual displacement from the land.
Initially, the means by which Arabs were displaced was through land purchases exploiting feudalistic Ottoman land laws that deprived Arab peasants of their property rights. But the failure to acquire more than 7 percent of the land meant that other means would need to be employed to gain control over the area envisioned for the “Jewish state”.
The Arabs naturally rejected the Mandate, and they also understood that the implementation of the Zionist project meant their subjugation to foreign powers. (Indeed, the British acknowledged that the Arabs of Palestine exercised a greater measure of self-governance under Ottoman rule!)
While Zionist propagandists like Elan Journo in his new hoax book What Justice Demands are fond of claiming that it was the Arabs who rejected Jewish self-determination in Palestine, the truth is that the Mandate itself constituted a rejection of this right of the land’s Arab inhabitants.
Moreover, the Arab leadership was insistent in their demand that the independence of Palestine be recognized under a constitution guaranteeing representative democracy and minority rights. The Zionist leadership tellingly rejected the democratic solution, as did the British (who described Arabs demanding that their right to self-determination be respected as “extremists”, whereas those who were willing to collaborate with the Zionist occupation regime were dubbed “moderate”).
Democracy simply was not a solution for the Zionists—it was rather an obstacle to be overcome to achieve their aims. In the view of the Zionists, the Palestinians had to be prevented from being able to exercise their right to self-determination, and so British guns were employed to that end.
But British guns only took the Zionists so far. They’d have to get the rest of the way toward establishment of their “Jewish state” on their own.
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
The solution favored by Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion, who would become Israel’s first prime minister and is known as the father of the country, was the “compulsory transfer” of Arabs outside of the area of the envisioned “Jewish state”.
Ben-Gurion was borrowing the term from the British, who proposed the idea of a forcible transfer of populations in order to partition Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states in the 1937 Peel Commission Report. And while Ben-Gurion initially felt the ethnic cleansing would have to be undertaken by the British, the Zionists eventually built their own formidable military force, the Haganah, enabling them to implement the “compulsory transfer” on their own.
When the UN, which replaced the defunct League of Nations following World War II, resurrected the stillborn partition plan, the Zionists recognized it as their opportunity to forcibly implement the “compulsory transfer” and land-grabbing necessary for their “Jewish state” to be established.
On May 14, 1948, the Zionist leadership unilaterally declared the existence of the state of Israel, citing as legal authority the UN “partition plan” resolution, General Assembly Resolution 181 of November 29, 1947. However, this resolution neither partitioned Palestine nor conferred any legal authority to the Zionists for their unilateral declaration.
Furthermore, the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), the body appointed by the General Assembly to come up with a solution and whose majority members recommended partition, explicitly acknowledged in its report that the goal of the Mandate to establish a “Jewish state” constituted a rejection of the right of the Arab Palestinians to self-determination.
This explains the grossly inequitable nature of the partition plan. Jews comprised about a third of the population and owned less than 7 percent of the land, whereas UNSCOP acknowledged that the Arabs were in “in possession of approximately 85 percent of the land”. Yet it nevertheless proposed that the Arabs should remain in possession of about 45 percent of the land for their state, whereas Jews should have about 55 percent of the land for theirs (with Jerusalem placed under international trusteeship).
Furthermore, when the Bedouin population was counted, Arabs constituted a majority even in the area of the proposed Jewish state, where Arabs also owned more land than Jews.
The majority recommendation, premised as it was on the rejection of self-determination as it applied to the Arab majority, constituted a violation of the very Charter under which the the General Assembly purported to be operating.
The minority recommendation of the UNSCOP report, by contrast, joined with the Arabs in favoring the democratic solution, proposing that the independence of Palestine be recognized, the same as had happened with every other Mandated territory, and a democratic government established respecting the rights of minorities.
Contrary to the popular myth that the UN created Israel, the partition plan was forwarded by the General Assembly to the Security Council, where it died. The US representative rightly pointed out that the only way to implement the plan was through force and that the UN had no authority to forcibly partition Palestine against the will of the majority of its inhabitants.
But the UN had provided political cover enough for the Zionists to implement the plan on their own. Already by the time they announced Israel’s existence and the neighboring Arab states responded by sending their armed forces into Palestine, a quarter of a million Arabs had been ethnically cleansed from their homes, and hundreds of Arab villages had been destroyed.
By the time it was over and armistice treaties were signed, more than 700,000 Arabs had fled or been expelled, never allowed to return, despite the recognition under international law that refugees of war have a right to return to their homeland.
The Jewish Nation State Law
The US mainstream media serve to manufacture consent for the US policy of supporting Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians. The nature of the coverage about Israel’s new “Nation State” law is no different. While the media may not be trying to defend such a blatantly racist law, the criticisms of the law fall within a very narrow spectrum and serves to propagandize the public with the false belief that Israel was established on democratic principles.
The Jewish Nation State Law was enacted as a “Basic Law”, which body of laws essentially serves as the supreme law of the land in the absence of an Israeli constitution. It states that Israel “is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.”
Moreover, it states that “The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared after the law’s enactment that it represented “a defining moment in the annals of Zionism and the annals of the state of Israel”. Meaninglessly and falsely adding that Israel “respects the rights of all its citizens”, Netanyahu described it as having “determined in law the founding principle of our existence” that “Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people”.
Indeed, the law does represent a manifestation of the founding principle of Israel’s existence; namely, the rejection of the right of the land’s Arab inhabitants to self-determination.
In its coverage of the law’s passage, the New York Times commented that critics are calling it “a betrayal of Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence, which ensured ‘complete equality of social and political rights’ for ‘all its inhabitants’ no matter their religion, race or sex.”
Of course, this lofty rhetoric in the Zionists’ unilateral declaration of Israel’s existence on May 14, 1948—euphemistically referred to by the thought-controlling Times as a “Declaration of Independence”—was belied by the actual means by which the “Jewish state” came into being, which was not through any kind of legitimate political process, but by ethnically cleansing most of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine from their homes and systematically wiping hundreds of Palestinian villages off the map.
Time magazine similarly reported on the Jewish Nation State Law under the headline “A New Law Shifts Israel Away from Democracy”, describing it contradicting the equal rights for all inhabitants promised in the “Declaration of Independence”—thus likewise maintaining the delusion that Israel was established on democratic principles.
Time also commented that the law should be understood within the context of the so-called “peace process” that the Trump administration has been vainly trying to revive. Indeed, the law is simply a reiteration of the propaganda talking point that Israel has a “right to exist” as a “Jewish state”, a well as Israel’s longstanding demand that the Palestinians recognize it as such.
In other words, Israel has long maintained as a prerequisite for any kind of peace agreement that the Palestinians must surrender their rights. They must surrender their property rights, their right to self-determination, and their right to return to their homeland by acceding that the means by which Israel came into being was legitimate.
The use of force, however, to prevent a people from achieving their freedom is anathema to the lofty rhetoric about Arabs’ rights contained in propaganda instruments like Britain’s Balfour Declaration and the Zionists’ legally null declaration of Israel’s existence, which was not a declaration of independence, but was announced while ethnic cleansing operations were underway in order to deny independence to the lands’ majority inhabitants.
The very idea of a state having a “right to exist” is nonsensical propaganda. No state has a “right to exist”. Abstract political entities don’t have rights; individuals do. The proper framework for approaching the issue is rather the universal right to self-determination, which is a right not being denied to Israelis by the Palestinians, but vice versa.
The Palestinians’ right to self-governance has always been rejected by the Zionist leadership. This rejection of both Arabs’ rights and democratic principles was manifest in the actual means by which the “Jewish state” came into being, from the rejectionist Mandate to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine that the British helped facilitate with the Balfour policy.
The Jewish Nation State Law doesn’t move Israel further away from democratic principles. It can’t. This isn’t logically possible when the very existence of the “Jewish state” is dependent upon ensuring that millions of rightful inhabitants are prevented from exercising their right to self-determination.
Amit-Semitic a little?
troll a little?
Naturally apologists for Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians incapable of producing an actual argument resort to the intellectual and moral cowardice of leveling ad hominem attacks instead.
Can you please list the so called crimes you are referring to? I am having difficulty in in understanding what you are referring to. The Arabs living under the Palestinian rule are under the Palestinian rule, but now have regular health care, schools, roads, jobs, universities and more due to Israel. The Arabs in Israel have crimes against them? In what way. Please provide sources to back up your statement.
Here’s a short list.
Read and weep….
The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols form the core of international humanitarian law.
—
Israel was formed by the ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Palestinians, driven from their homes with no recompenses, to refugee camps. Israel took far more than 50% of their land at that time. Since then, through illegal settlement building, Palestinians are squeezed into less than 20% of their own land, and that amount is constantly shrinking !!!
Fifty years ago, as the fog of the Six-Day War lifted and Israel celebrated its “miraculous” victory over Arab nations, a darker reality sank in. Israel’s military then dominated millions of Palestinians living on their own land.
—
Then there’s the ongoing land sea and air blockade.
I told you already, troll, to read the article.
“Can you please list the so called crimes you are referring to?”
I can help. This is a great start: ifamericaknew.org/
Anti-Semite, hwy505?
Do you mean anti-Jewish, anti-Christian, anti-Muslim, anti-Arab or “Anti-Of Middle East Origin”? Which are included in the original definition of “Semite” as first defined in the 19th century.
Zionist propaganda, also in the 19th century, promoted “Semite” as being exclusively “Jewish”, accidental or deliberate makes no difference it effectively disenfranchises Christians, Muslims and Arabs.
The word “Gay” actually means “Happy and carefree”, used to-day to describe same sex relations, without defining specifically, Homosexual or Lesbian.
If we don`t know what we are saying, how on earth are we supposed to communicate?
Anti Zionist a lot.
Really? Israel uses democratic principles to rule the country. However, if Israel wishes to declare itself a Jewish state then let them do so. If you think this is incorrect, then let us begin at the beginning. LET US FIRST: challenge the 57 islamic countries and other communist countries on this principle. Let us begin with the matter of Pakistan, a large swathe of territory that in fact belongs to Hindu India. Then we can scoot along to that long overdue matter of Cyprus that no journalist seems concerned about. Turkey is in ILLEGAL OCCUPATION OF 37% of Cyprus. Leave Israel to be a Jewish state since there are communist and muslim states.
PS> DEMOCRACY DOES NOT MEAN BEING RUN OVER BY RABID MUSLIMS AND COMMUNISTS WHOM HATE JESUS CHRIST.
No, it does not. Please read the article before attempting to comment on it.
The article was read. But the bile causing vomit affect makes it difficult to continue reading the disinformation, inaccuracies, ignorant comments and full fledged lies. In fact it is very difficult to find any actual fact in the article. A good writer can make anyone believe anything. Your writing is always very convincing propaganda, however any semi-educated person with less than average computer savvy can find out the truth that you choose to ignore. Israel is the most democratic country in the world. It is the home of the Jewish nation which offers equal rights to all citizens and helps those around the world who are in need. Anything short of that is a complete lie. You really should do your homework away from propaganda websites.
Have you considered getting professional help for your condition?
So what’s your preference, a two state or a one state solution?
omg, another Zionist who cannot maintain a rational dialogue and gets in a twist with wild emotions and insults. what else is new?
And yet you don’t even so much as attempt to actually identify even a single factual or logical error in the article!
Banned for trolling (and violating the terms of use of the comments section).
problem seems to be your digestive system not the article.
WTF is democratic about apartheid?
Where is there apartheid? Do you know the meaning of that word? You are aware that Arabs have 100% equal rights in Israel, whereas Jews and Christians do not in Muslim countries. Is your opinion of them also apartheid? An Arab Supreme judge, 20% Arab student body in Jewish universities, equal opportunity in jobs and slew of other equality and free rights is about as far from apartheid as cheesecake is to lobster — absolutely no connection.
“You are aware that Arabs have 100% equal rights in Israel”
That’s blatant hasbara BS.
Even though you obviously have access to a computer and the internet, it more than appears that you have not used the combination to become better informed – your ignorance appears to be wilful.
Anyone who is passionate about humanity, civil rights and current affairs can be expected to be up to date about these matters.
That you’re not is revealing volumes about your true intent.
Below are some links that you should consider reading….although I have strong reservations if you’ll be able to digest the information in an appreciative manner – ouch!
—-
Israel should be shunned as an Apartheid State, says Irish senator [Gulfnews – July 2018 ]
It’s time to admit that Israel is an apartheid state [Middle East Monitor – April 2018]
UN report: Israel has established an ‘apartheid regime’ [Al-Jazeera – 2017]
There’s more, much more such as racially segregated kinder gardens and forced sterilizations for woman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPX0F-UqF-k
1/3 of Israel consists of Arabs who live under military rule. As for the Arabs who are citizens, they are second class citizens who do not have 100% equal rights. They are not allowed to hold senior cabinet positions or to serve in the ruling coalition. The police don’t protect their neighborhoods. They have trouble getting building permits. They get 1/10th the gov. services.
Totally false. Arabs in Israel do not have equal rights with Jewish Israelis. In fact all Jews are not equal in Israel. European and American white Jewish Israelis have superior rights to African, Asian, and Arab Jews. If it weren’t for the state propaganda of manufacturing an evil Arab antiSemitism so they can have a common enemy, Israel would disintigrate into civil war.
Totallyh false, Liadan. You have no idea of what you talking about and just repeat the hateful slogans of others.
No, I use research and personal experience. Saying that Palestinians are not equal to Jews in Israel is a fact. Even Netanyahu has said this. Israeli laws say this.
PS…I have lived in both Israel and Palestine. Have you?
I am not repeating ‘hateful slogans’ I am repeating facts. Prove me wrong if you disagree.
A pretty mindless attempt to obscure the reality in Zionist Israel, CenaFoura, there is nowhere in the world that can be compared with Zionist Israel, apart from Apartheid South Africa when it existed.
Even Islamic Iran has some 30,000 Iranian followers of Judaism, all with their rights guaranteed in the Iranian constitution (as have some 300,000 Iranian Christians), one of Iran`s UN delegation is Jewish, Zionist Israeli would never tolerate a non-Jewish member of their UN Delegation.
In September 2016, speaking in the Knesset, ex Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, and ex Israeli Defence Minister, Moshe Yaalon, both stated “(Zionist) Israel is acting like and becoming a Fascist State”.
When two leading Israeli figures compare Zionist Israel with Nazi Germany, the most dedicated Israeli supporter should be seriously concerned.
Judaism is a fine old religion, Judaism is the foundation on which the two later Semite Religions of Christianity and Islam were based. Judaism, Christianity and Islam all venerate the God of Abraham.
While Islam does not accept that Jesus was “The Son of God” Islam does accept that Jesus was a Prophet of God, regarding Mary and Joseph as Saints. Judaism of course rejects all Christian (and Muslim) beliefs completely – you pay`s your money and you makes your choice.
It is somewhat surprising that, in this age of instant information, there are some who hold beliefs that have no foundation in reality, sadly you provide an example.
Although Israel does not have a constitution, the law stipulates that all citizens are equal and the law is followed to a tee. No matter what religious background one is in Israel the individual has all democratic rights, including freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom to work at any job/receive medical care in any facility/study in any school, etc. The ignorance of the writer and his fellow propagandist does not behoove their supposed level of knowledge on the subject. It only shows that the disinformation they receive from propaganda sources are completely inaccurate and that the writer has never stepped foot in Israel.
Although Israel does not have a constitution, the law stipulates that all citizens are equal and the law is followed to a tee. No matter what religious background one is in Israel the individual has all democratic rights, including freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom to work at any job/receive medical care in any facility/study in any school, etc. The ignorance of the writer and his fellow propagandist does not behoove their supposed level of knowledge on the subject. It only shows that the disinformation they receive from propaganda sources are completely inaccurate and that the writer has never stepped foot in Israel.
why do you keep saying that the law is followed to a T? On what basis? Sounds good? Is that the basis? There’s no way it’s followed to a T.
That`s delusional wishful thinking P&Q.
Only Israeli Jews are “equal under the Law”, Israeli non-Jews are second class residential citizens, if they donate blood, it is marked Non-Jewish and is regularly refused by Zionist Israeli Jewish patients.
Non-Jewish villages and schools receive 25% of the funding allocated to Jewish Israeli villages and schools, despite Israeli Non-Jews paying the same taxes!
It`s the policies of Zionism and not a requirement of Judaism.
It takes a massive dose of Myopia to ignore the reality, P&Q Zionism is a disgrace to Judaism – Zionist Israel brings shame upon Jews.
“never stepped foot in Israel.”
Sounds like you have never stepped foot there either or never were exposed to what’s actually happening.
No, challenge them all at the same time. And contrary to Zionist myth, those dictatorships are challenged as well,.,
Communists are/were Christian lol
You got a bit of brainwashing peaking a little there.
So freedom for one people is totally dependent on the freedom of all people? How will this be accomplished since demand they all happen simultaneously or not at all? You also keep talking about Muslims? Aren’t you aware that Palestinians are of all religions? They are Christian, Muslim, Ba; Hai’, and yes, even Jewish. But Jewish Palestinians are not recognized by Israel, for it shows the lie that the conflict is religion instead of land theft.
And why do you conflate all Arab and Muslim majority states and as one. Palestinians are not Jordanian nor Egyptian, nor any other group. That’s like saying all Asians are the same or all blacks are the same or all whites are the same. The Japanese are not Chinese. Africans are not Jamaicans. Do they all look alike to you? Can you not tell the differences?
So stop saying Palestinians can go to Saudi Arabia or that there are 22 Arab states. They are a separate group. They deserve their own state with their own culture and own mores.
Your total post is illogical, immoral, racist, and unfactual.
What is the practical ramification of the nation-state law? How does anything change? Hasn’t Israel always been a state that is just for Jews?
You are right. It has no practical ramifications. The government has always acted on the same basis as contained in the new law.
It Depends on Zionist interpretation Blog, if you consider the David and Solomon “Kingdom of Israel” was a forerunner of to-days State of Israel, though outside of the Torah (Old Testament) there is not one single reference or any scrap of archeological evidence that supports The Torah claims.
In the time of The Kingdom of Israel (lasting 69 years max), Jews were a minority, the large majority under “Hebrew” rule/Administration were Pagan, and Pagans were the large majority in “the Middle East” right up to the 4th century when the Roman Emperor Constantine adopted Christianity as the official Roman Religion.
Abraham and the Hebrews originated in to-days Iraq (when it was Egypt), Abraham was born in the ancient city of Ur, close to to-days Basra, in those days there could not have been many Hebrews, certainly not thousands, who arrived in Filistine (Canaan).
There were several “countries” in the M.E. that had Jewish “Kings” King Hiram ruled the city of Acre, for 60 years or so, there was Jewish rule in Kurdistan (Adiabene) and Yemen (Himyarite, Ethiopia, (Semien) and the largest and longest lasting of the lot was in the Ukraine and southern Russia (Khazarea) 7th to 10th century.
Most Jews were converts, a Christian adviser in the courts of Emperor Charlamange, Deacon Bodo was so impressed with his Jewish colleagues he converted to Judaism, while a Jewish buddy Paul Alvers converted to Christianity, and why not? It`s the same God!
Many Jews and Pagans converted to Christianity under Roman rule (Don`t upset the boss!) but some Jews could not accept Jesus as “The Son of God”, then came Islam, accepting the teachings of Abraham and Jesus, as Prophets of God, but not (in the case of Jesus) The Son of God.
Islam adopted the Jewish requirements of male circumcision and dietary rules (if it`s Halal it`s Kosher), and there were wholesale conversions to Islam throughout the M.E. Not so in Eastern Europe where Islam never spread.
Throughout the ages “conquest” as always claimed the support of religion (The Enola Gay, it`s crew and the atomic bomb were all “Blessed” by Father George Zabelka before annihilating some 300,000 Japanese civilians).
But non of previous conquerors have insisted on the removal of the citizens with differing religious beliefs, in that aspect Israel is unique, it`s continuing existence totally reliant on unconditional USA Financial, Military and more importantly, Diplomatic support.
Compare the USA attitude towards North Korea who have remained within their 1950 borders, with 5/10? nuclear warheads, and Israel, now occupying all of Palestine, part of Syria and Lebanon, and 200/400 nuclear warheads (CIA estimates) AND a USA supplied Tomahawk delivery system.
Like Donald moving the USA embassy to Jerusalem, the Zionist Nation-State is simply confirming the reality.
If it were a comic book story, no one would believe it!
P.S. Sorry ramble so much!
Would it even matter if Jews owned the whole place 2000 years ago? If you leave for 2000 years you lose possession.
David ben Gurion and Yitzhak ben Zvi regularly stated, and wrote in their books; “The Palestinians are the descendants of the inhabitants of the ancient land of Judea”.
Of course they are, over the years most converted to Christianity and Islam, same as most of the world.
Their is no logic to a Zionist State, exclusive for Jews, in the heart of the Middle East, Blog.
Particularly when you consider that the large majority of the worlds 15 million or so followers of Judaism, don`t live in Israel, they are established in their various homelands throughout the world having neither the need nor the desire to live on occupied Palestinian land.
Britain was always uneasy with Zionist aims (Land from the Nile to the Euphrates), what Britain envisaged was immigrant Jews living, Amish style, under Arab rule in Palestine.
WW2 blew that idea right out of the water and Britain gave up on trying to mediate, the USA took control, providing unconditional Financial, Military and (more important) Diplomatic support, it`s no exaggeration to say “The USA allows Zionists to get away with murder”.
It`s a continual surprise to me, the way American voters seem unconcerned with USA double standards in the M.E. – Jeremy Hammond`s creating of FPJ is to be applauded, his efforts at “enlightenment” are well researched, accurate and resented by the ignorant or myopic!
70 years of Zionism in Palestine and it keeps getting worse for Palestinians.
It`s a funny old world, Blog.
It would only matter if an individual Jew could trace his property rights over an individual plot of land back that far. The idea that “the Jews” collectively had some kind of “right” to just ethnically cleanse Palestine of most of its Arab inhabitants — which is how Israel came into being — is morally repugnant.
“On July 19, the Israeli legislature, the Knesset, passed a law defining Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, prompting criticism in the US mainstream media that it represents a departure from the democratic principles Israel was founded upon.”
Israel was originally founded to cleanse Palestine.
This is documented historically and Israeli leaders (of current and past) are direct quotes saying that it must be cleansed from Palestinians. It was never Jewish to begin with and there were only what….2% MAX of Jewish people in the region? Then, once the campaign to take over (if you will) began, they started rapidly moving in. There are texts, histories and quotes all pointing at this as being the plan and this whole “Well, this land is Jewish for the Jews now” is nothing new or unexpected.
There is actually a very good graphic/card to show how the Jewish settlements were placed, where they were, with Palestinian land slowly and VERY aggressively being taken away from the people who actually live there. It really is true genocide. And that is not a “theory” or throwing words at the topic. This was the desire of the Jewish leaders. There is even a quote that says that they want to erase anything and everything to do with Palestine so it does not even exist in history books.
-I will beat the snowflakes to it: ZERO hate or negative connotation towards the faith and the people.
The minority recommendation of the UNSCOP report, by contrast, joined
with the Arabs in favoring the democratic solution, proposing that the
independence of Palestine be recognized, the same as had happened with
every other Mandated territory, and a democratic government established
respecting the rights of minorities.
…..
How would the Jews be able to live peacefully in palestine as a minority. ? The Palestininan leader haj amin, had just thanked Hitler for agreeing to extend the holocaust to the middle east.
It seems unlikely that Haj amin would respect the rights of the Jews.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/full-official-record-what-the-mufti-said-to-hitler/
Hitler hosts Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini in 1941 in Germany. (Heinrich Hoffmann Collection/Wikipedia)
The Arab countries were firmly convinced that Germany would win the war and that the Arab cause would then prosper. The Arabs were Germany’s natural friends because they had the same enemies as had Germany, namely the English, the Jews and the Communists.
..
3. As soon as this had happened, the Fuhrer would on his own give the Arab world the assurance that its hour of liberation had arrived. Germany’s objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power.
..
The Grand Mufti replied that it was his view that everything would come to pass just as the Fuhrer had indicated. He was fully reassured and satisfied by the words which he had heard form the Chief of the German
The same way they had prior to the conflict between Jewish and Arab communities in Palestine that resulted from the Zionists implementing their project, backed by British guns, to reconstitute Palestine into a demographically “Jewish state”.
I would also remind you that WWII had ended, the Mufti was an exiled former leader appointed by the British and removed by the British with marginal influence.
The bottom line is that you can speculate all you want about what would have happened if the Zionists and their Western partners had accepted rather than rejected the democratic solution — but the fact remains that Israel was not founded on democratic principles, but the absolute rejection of democratic principles, manifested ultimately in the ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Arabs from their homes in Palestine in order for the “Jewish state” to be established.
That is what you are trying to defend.
according to abbas it was the arabs who forced the palestinians to emigrate, not the jews
http://www.israellycool.com/2018/02/23/that-time-mahmoud-abbas-changed-his-story-about-the-palestinian-refugees/
But almost 40 years earlier, he was quoted in the March 1976 issue of Falastine a-Thaura (then the official journal of the PLO in Beirut) as saying
“The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live.”
Then Abbas is misinformed. Israel was established by ethnically cleansing most of the Arab population from their homes in Palestine.
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/11/14/benny-morriss-untenable-denial-of-the-ethnic-cleansing-of-palestine/
I am not sure why you say haj amin is a marginal figure. Judging by the comments of abbas he is a palestinian national hero.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/163916
Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas spoke glowingly last Friday of the “legacy” of the infamous Hajj Amin al-Husseini, who was a collaborator with the Nazis, and was prepared to conduct the mass murder of the Jews of the Land of Israel in the event of a Nazi invasion. The Mufti, Abbas said, was a great man whose ways should be emulated by all PA Arabs, and was worthy of great praise.
Abbas may very well view him as a national hero, yet it does not follow that in 1947 he was anything other than a marginalized figure who had been removed from the religious leadership position he had been appointed to by the British and exiled.
Furthermore, you are still deflecting from the point, which I’ll repeat:
The bottom line is that you can speculate all you want about what would have happened if the Zionists and their Western partners had accepted rather than rejected the democratic solution — but the fact remains that Israel was not founded on democratic principles, but the absolute rejection of democratic principles, manifested ultimately in the ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Arabs from their homes in Palestine in order for the “Jewish state” to be established.
That is what you are trying to defend.
Perhaps you should examine Zionist cooperation with Hitler before tossing aroung the exiled ‘Mufti..”
Look up the Haavari Agreement. Also look up images. The commemerative coin with the Star of David and the Swastica imprinted is chilling..
Intersting that you use the Times of Israel to support the claim that the disgraced and exiled Mufti started the Holocaust, because the Times prints ut the entire conversation between Hitler and the Mufti, as a record was kept, and it concludes that the Mufti nad no such involvement. Plus the Palestinians did not follow him, hence his removal as Mufti and banishment from Palestine.
hehe. the existence of other oppressive regimes like Pakistan absolves Israel of being an oppressive regime. That logic is rock solid.