Funding Palestine against American Zionism

Great Debates
41

Malthus, the sites given are hardly mainstream historical sites (Dangoor is defintely not) and both have some political axe to grind.

http://www.megastories.com/mideast/glossary/cousins.htm

(megastories is a news site devoted to in depth coverage of all events)

excerpt from an article by Israeli Rab HaCohen

http://www.antiwar.com/hacohen/h-col.html
I’m not denying that persecution took place in Arab countries after 1948, however it did not genrally constitute ethnic cleansing such as had taken place in Israel

http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=398

Back to Jackmanniiis orginal question: here is an article which tackles this:

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story424.html

42

I do not dispute that Jews generally had an easier time, and faced considerably less oppression, in the Islamic world as opposed to Christian Europe - but that is not really in issue.

Moreover, I would be delighted to learn about King Hasan, and his policies, of which I am indeed ignorant. Links?

But, I think the argument is whether, in general, Jews faced persecution in a variety of Arab countries which compelled them to leave. So far, I have seen nothing to indicate that this is generally untrue - though I have not read the posts below yet.

43

You dismiss the sites I listed as having “political axes to grind”. And these do not, I take it?

It is more fruitful to deal with the information, rather than casting aspersions on the authour. So I will avoid giving my opinion of the legitimacy, or otherwise, of these sites.

I will deal with the quoted exerpts:

“It is commonly thought in Israel that the vast influx of Jews from Arab countries was caused by widespread Arab persecution. That’s about half the truth. It is certainly true that there was a rise in tension between Arabs and Jews in Arab countries such as Egypt, Morocco, and Iraq after the creation of Israel and the 1948 war, which led to riots lootings, and some killings.”

So then the account in the above link is, essentially, true - according to the site you chose. The Jews did face persecution.

“But the other untold part of the story is that the early Zionists proactively organised and encouraged the wholesale emigration of Jews from communities like Iraq, exaggerating the dangers Jews would face if they stayed. Many Sephardic Jews said years later that they did not really know what had hit them until they were firmly ensconced in the new residential developments of southern Israel, speaking Hebrew and cut off from the Arab world that they had known.”

This seems on its face and without citations, to be incedible.

First, what exactly is “wrong” with encouraging people to emigrate - when they faced persecution in their home country?

Second, were these dangers “exaggerated”? Some evidence of this would be nice. Current history demonstrates that, on the contrary, the dangers were very real - I myself would not like to be living under Saddam right now.

Third, would Iraqi Jews have been better off in Iraq? If so, why don’t they want to go back? I am sure they could have, if they really wanted to - Israel hardly holds them prisoner.

In sum, I find it difficult to credit that an entire minority, over a very large area, could be convinced to leave their ancient homelands merely by Israeli propaganda.

As for the second quote:

“Moreover: even though Jews were indeed harassed (by the people and/or regimes) in Arab countries following the 1948 war, blaming the Arabs of ethnic cleansing is shamefully cynical when it is imputed by the very Zionists who demanded “let my people go”, or by the same Israel that did all it could to force those very countries to let their Jews leave. The global Zionist pressure on each and every country, from the Soviet Union to Syria, to let its Jewish citizens go, was part of Israel’s efforts to consolidate its Jewish majority; that is why Israel always urged Western countries not to let those Jewish immigrants in, lest they fail to make Aliya”

This one contains some frankly bizzare claims - Israel, “pressuring” the Soviet Union? Is this fellow for real? What was Israel going to do, invade the Soviets? :stuck_out_tongue:

I myself see absolutely nothing in even this strange quote to indicate that the above account was wrong - this fellow’s point of view is that it doesn’t lie in the Zionist mouth to complain about “ethnic cleansing”, when they “forced” these countries to “let their Jews leave”. He doesn’t dispute that the Jews in question wanted to leave - indeed, he says they had good reason. But it is “shameful” and “cynical” to point this out, for some reason.

This, frankly, is a crock. Why should anyone object to “forcing” a country to “let” a minority leave - if it wants to? Are these countries prisons?

Where is the “shame” and “cynicism” in pointing out that driving your minorities to attempt to flee your country is ethnic cleansing? Even if your country benefits, by taking in refugees. Should 17th century England be ashamed of helping Hugenots fleeing France - and be precluded from critisizing France for its “dragoon” laws, which caused them to flee?

The argument just does not make sense - unless, of course, you see Israel as the font of all that is bad. This guy evidently does.

Again, neither of these cites - for all that they attempt to impute blame to Israel (or at least argue that Israel pointing out that what was done was ethnic cleaning is somehow “shameful”) - actually allege that the persecutions did not happen.

So, is the case over? If so, I take it that we can say, “the two situations are exactly parallel”. If not, why not?

44

Bingo.

It is this sort of grotesque imbalance in views that makes meaningful dialogue impossible. It’s bad enough that so many of the protagonists in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict are guilty of this. One would hope (vainly) that participants in this forum could refrain from simplistic denunciations of one side while making excuses for similar (or worse) behavior on the other side.

If the examples of “ethnic cleansing” by Arabs of their Jewish citizens do not impress MC, perhaps he’d like an opportunity to explain away the ethnic cleansing practiced by Saddam Hussein on his citizens - using practices far worse than any claimed against Israel, and lacking any justification of self-defense.

45

Denial ain’t a river in Egypt friend, take a look in the mirror some time. How well do you know the other side’s view?

Before I respond, are the citizens you’re refering to the Kurds?

P.S. greco, thank you very much for that heartfelt, and very logical description of the conflict in Israel/Palestine.

46

Zionism is not Jewish. You err when you confuse the two. Visit Neturei Karta. To quote Ghandi, “Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and in-human to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home.
…And now a word to the Jews in Palestine. I have no doubt that they are going about it the wrong way. The Palestine of the Biblical conception is not a geographical tract. It is in their hearts. But if they must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by
the goodwill of the Arabs. They should seek to convert the Arab
heart. The same God rules the Arab heart who rules the Jewish heart. They can offer satyagraha in front of the Arabs and offer themselves to be shot or thrown into the Dead Sea without raising a little finger against them. They will find the world opinion in their favour in their religious aspiration. There are hundreds of ways of reasoning with the Arabs, if they will only discard the help of the British bayonet. As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them.”

If the Israelis wanted peace, they’d have it.

47

No offense, but as an administrator, you should hold yourself to a higher standard. As I understand it, the zionist leadership was not happy with the partition plan (“While the Yishuv’s leadership formally accepted the 1947 Partition Resolution, large sections of Israel’s society - including…Ben-Gurion - were opposed to or extremely unhappy with partition and from early on viewed the war as an ideal opportunity to expand the new state’s borders beyond the UN earmarked partition boundaries and at the expense of the Palestinians.”), and was the first to violate the partition boundries (“Before the end of the mandate and, therefore before any possible intervention by Arab states, the Jews, taking advantage of their superior military preparation and organization, had occupied…most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948…In contrast, the Palestine Arabs did not seize any of the territories reserved for the Jewish state under the partition resolution.”). April comes before May, right?

www.cactus48.com/truth.html

48

I’ll answer this one first, Saddam Hussein practices ethnic cleansing (though ethnic cleansing is the probably the wrong word for his attacks on the kurds as he was motivated by revenge not necessarily a wish to remove them) on his own citizens because he is a sociopathic despot who will do anything that he thinks is to his advantage. His own justification was that the Kurds had supported Iran (which like the Kurds, are a shi’ite nation) in the Iran-Iraq war. Tu quoque are unimpressive and cannot be used as justifications.

Yes the Jews did face persecution, but not systematic removal like the Palestinians.

That site gives the mainstream historical view, Israel wanted the Mizahri to emmigrate, to Israel, in order to consolidate the Jewish majority.

Governments can use political pressures, other than military. The truth is Israel desparately wanted these people and persuaded the soviet union not to allow them to emmigrate there in order that they would emmigrate to Israel.

Please note the author of the second article is a Jewish Israeli citizen who is anti-war’s ‘correspondent’ in Israel.

Israel is not the font of all evil, but it still must take responsibility for what it has done.

49

So it’s only the Israelis that have practiced “forcible removal” of other ethnic groups, according to MC?

Historical ignorance is a terrible thing. It is clear that Saddam Hussein has practiced ethnic cleansing on a huge and grotesque scale, forcibly displacing at least 800,000 of his people, “disappearing” 200,000 more and forcing 3-4 million to flee the country (perhaps MC would like to argue that they were lured away).

It’s not just the gassing of the Kurds.

Saddam’s crimes are well documented, and cannot remotely be justified by his regime having been under continuous assault by numerous neighboring nations, as is the case with Israel. Yet far too many in the Arab world and here obsess over Israel and comparatively ignore brutality elsewhere in the region, practiced by Arab leaders on their citizens.

Are Israel’s policies (as I mentioned previously in this thread) in part bankrupt, being stupid, self-destructive and at times morally wrong? Yes. But ignoring the responsibility of other parties to the dispute and participating in totally one-sided, vicious denunciations of Israel suggests the play of two forces - extreme historical ignorance and blind predjudice, separately or in concert.

Neither is very attractive.
The Palestinians and their allies in the Arab world are not the font of all evil, but must still take responsibility for what they have done - ending the preaching of hate and violence, and accepting their neighbor, Israel.

50

You are right when you state that Judaism is not Zionism. But passing off Neturai Karta as a normative Jewish view on Zionism is like passing off the SCUM Manifesto as a normative view on feminism.

Zev Steinhardt

51

Is this by any chance the same Gandhi who advocated to the Jews of Europe “nonviolent resistance” to the Nazis - and if that didn’t work, mass suicide?!?

His methods offer peace for Israelis and Jews all right - the peace of being dead.

http://www.fourthfreedom.org/php/t-nsc-index.php?hinc=gandhi.hinc

"Jewish leaders questioned whether satyagraha was appropriate or even possible in the face of Hitlerism. Gandhi wrote in 1938 that the Jews of Germany could resist nonviolently. “I am convinced that if someone with courage and vision can arise among them to lead them in a nonviolent action, the winter of their despair can in the twinkling of an eye be turned into the summer of hope.” 51 Martin Buber replied sharply to Gandhi in a widely quoted letter:

In the five years which I myself spent under the present regime, I observed many instances of genuine satyagraha among the Jews. . . . Such actions, however, apparently exerted not the slightest influence on their opponents. . . . A diabolic universal steam-roller cannot thus be withstood. 52

Judah Magnes, the outspoken Jewish educator and pacifist, himself a disciple of Gandhi, also responded skeptically, questioning how nonviolent action could be used against Nazi cruelty.53 In reply Gandhi continued to insist that nonviolent action could be used effectively by the Jewish community, and that while many would suffer in such resistance efforts, in the end “Herr Hitler will bow before the courage” of satyagraha. 54 "

I take it that we are now expected to take Mr. Gandhi’s advice on Jewish or Israeli matters, and if we did, there would be peace - because there would be no Jews or Israelis left. :rolleyes:

52
  • You offer exactly zero proof for the assertion that there was “no systemic removal” of Jews from Arab lands; but that is balanced by the fact that you offer exactly zero proof for the assertion that there was systemic removal of Palistinians.

Odd then that Palistinians make up some 20% of the modern population of Israel, from which you claim they have been “systemically removed” (and vote!), whereas there remain only a tiny remenant of the historic Jewish communities in countries like Iraq. :rolleyes:

  • You assert that the Zionists wanted Iraqi Jews to immigrate, which may well be true. How does that contradict the facts of their persecution and attempted removal?

  • You say that Israel could apply “other pressures” (unspecified) on the Soviet Union - without apparently realizing the inherent implausability of a tiny country like Israel “pressuring” an unfriendly superpower like the Soviet Union, which was at the time busy arming its arab client states - against Israel. Does this make any sense to anyone?

  • Who cares if the author was an Israeli Jew? There are lots and lots of Zionist-hating Jews in Israel. Israel, being a democracy, does not persecute them, which is a good thing.

“Arab countries are not the font of all evil, but they still must take responsibility for what they have done.”