From traumas there is a phenomena of “survivors guilt”. Its not literally that people are guilty that they survived, though that occurs in particularly stressed individuals.

“Survivors guilt” is in the healthy range of motivation. American Jews were motivated by the sentiment “if it were us?” morphing into the strong motivation of “how can I help?”

Its not all that different than many dissenters’ motivation, “if it were us” (walking compassionately in another’s shoes), and “how can I help?” (actually doing something about it, something positive).

I see misrepresentation in the characterization of Israel as “only” undertaking ethnic cleansing, and not also somehow conducting developing and protecting a community.

In the environment post WW-2 of European Jews not permitted to migrate to Great Britain, France, US, Russia and instead expected to return to the towns where most of their neighbors cheered as the shuttled them off to death camps, it makes perfect sense to me that they would seek out a life in Israel.

That wrongs occur currently deserves attention and significant repair.

But, to rationalize a similarly simplistic description of history, seems hypocritical to me. Worse than hypocritical as it insists on continued war, the LEAST democratic and most suppressive political setting, both externally and internally.

Also, quite funny, here is a man who was not even born in the region, speaking perfect English with Queen’s accent, probably living in a house confiscated from a refugee family, and laying the blame squarely on the “native savages”, including putting the onus on them to fix the refugee problem that his colonial immigration and ethnic cleansing has created.

That a formerly suppressed community subject to continual prejudice now found a base of dignity, freedom, self-governance, was a profound good in the world, a truly progressive era.

What needs to happen now is that the Palestinian community achieve something similar to what the Jewish community achieved in the founding and evolution of Israel.

Not that Israel should be subject to threat or to weaken.

You don’t like that he is proud of Israel, presents Israel as a positive effort?

“democracy established” (for the Palestinians in the Galilee at this time?)
“Violence imposed by the hostility of our neighbours” (Were they responsible for Plan Dalet?)
“…perhaps the memories of the Sinai expedition…” (Nice euphemism for premeditated and unprovoked aggression.)
Prof Toynbee’s statement is a “monstrous blasphemy” (I would have expected better from a linguist)
Arab refugees “suffering certain anguish” and “temporary suffering” (Gross understatements if not callous lies.)
“The refugee problem is the result of an Arab policy which created the problem by the invasion of Israel. Which perpetuates it by refusing to accommodate them into their expanding labour market” (So the Nakba was all the Arabs fault, as is Israel’s denial of the legal right of return.)
 
I do not share your dry sense of humour. In fact it stinks.

The effort to dismiss them, is at least partially an effort of historical revision, in fact and in emphasis.