+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

A letter to the Israeli government from a retired terrorist

Ruth Reznik was only 14 when she joined a Zionist militia and took up arms against the British in Palestine. Now, she says, is the time to understand why Gazans are taking up arms against Israel.

By Ruth Reznik (translated by Sinewave)

I was drafted to the Irgun, a pre-state, right-wing Zionist militia, in the summer break after eighth grade, after I voiced my intention to enlist with either the Irgun or with the Lehi. As it happened, the representatives of the Irgun were the first to meet me. I wasn’t even 14 at the time, but the strong desire to join the underground resistance grew ever since the hanging of Eliahu Hakim and Eliahu Beit-Zuri, two Lehi men who were executed by the British in Cairo for the murder of the Baron Moyne (responsible for the 1941 Struma disaster, which claimed the lives of over 900 Jewish refugees in 1941). Hakim and Beit-Zuri were sent to the gallows on March 22, 1945.

At the time, my resolve to join the resistance against the British grew as more and more members of the resistance were handed death sentences, and as the gates to the country were closing in the face of waves of Jewish refugees from Europe. I decided it was time to become part of the fight against the British occupier.

Irgun fighters training in 1947. (photo: Archive of Jabotinsky Institute in Israel/CC BY 2.5)

Irgun fighters training in 1947. (photo: Archive of Jabotinsky Institute in Israel/CC BY 2.5)

Even though I was only a teenager, the danger did not deter me. I sat through nights full of resistance theory; entire evenings were spent getting familiar with how to use light firearms like Stens and Brens. We also learned how to identify gun calibers in the dark as well as different kinds of grenades and explosives. During vacations, we underwent live fire training and ground exercises. The lessons took place in a kindergarten located in Tel Aviv’s Florentine neighborhood, and in 1947, Arab gunmen were already sniping at nearby Hertzl street from Jaffa’s Hassan Bek Mosque. I took part in the funerals of fallen Irgun members who died in the conquering of the Menashiya neighbourhood in Jaffa. And in May 1948, the State of Israel declared its independence and the Irgun was disbanded. At age 15-and-a-half I was already a retired resistance fighter.

To this day, I understand the need of an occupied people to resist their occupier, and establish underground resistance forces until they gain their sovereignty. The same happened with oppressed peoples in America, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Kenya, South Africa and many other countries.

I raise this issue now in order to try and show that the occupation of Gaza will bring many deaths among our soldiers. 30, 300, 3,000, 300,000? And what about the tens of thousands who will come home wounded and shell-shocked? We cannot erase the hatred toward the occupiers. I still remember how Shoshana Damari’s simple song Anemones made the Queen’s soldiers go crazy.

Suppose we manage to re-occupy Gaza again, only to evacuate it years later. Will we not create the next generation of terrorists with our own hands? My suggestion is that the Israeli government remember Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. One year before he arrived at the Israeli Knesset, he gave a famous television interview in which he was asked about the possibility of peace with Israel. He answered: “A thousand years will pass before we make peace with Israel… rivers of blood pass between us… but a wise and daring man makes brave decisions and is not dragged down by hot heads.”

I remind you that two of the leaders of anti-British resistance movements, Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, became Israeli prime ministers. Nelson Mandela, who was a prisoner of the apartheid South African government, was the man who, in his wisdom, prevented terrible bloodshed in his country.

Ruth Reznik is chair of No2Violence NGO and winner of the Israel Prize for special contribution to society and the nation. The post was first published on the No2Violence website. You can also read it in Hebrew on Local Call.

Gaza dispatch: Why the people support Hamas
‘Ending the siege is not a Hamas demand – it is a Palestinian one’

Newsletter banner 4 - 540

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article



    * Required


    1. Joel

      Nelson Mandela had a partner in his efforts to end bloodshed. His partner was Prime Minister F. W. de Klerk.

      It takes two to make peace.

      Reply to Comment
      • Giora Me'ir

        And unfortunately Abbas does not have one.

        Reply to Comment
      • anwaar

        Joel world pressure force De Klerk to make peace.

        Reply to Comment
        • Joel

          Maybe so.

          Reply to Comment
    2. Konrad Kalejs

      Deleted by moderator. Commenter is using a Nazi’s name.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        “… Only the mass emigration of occupiers to Brooklyn …”

        But Konrad baby

        Didn’t you say that America is already Jewish occupied territory? How come you want Israeli Jews to emigrate there too?

        Personally, I would rather see Jewish Americans make Aliyah to Israel. Go on Konrad baby. Give that wish your blessing. It would mean a lot to me. You know you want to make me happy, don’t you? Go on, be a good little Konrad, you know you want to …

        Reply to Comment
    3. Josef

      One of the main differences between Hamas and the IDF is that all those working for Hamas are doing things voluntarily, for free. Many of those hold down daytime jobs as shopkeepers or taxi drivers. Whereas those working for the IDF (and of the Irgun and the like of yesteryear) expect a payment and pension for their services. If the Israeli State turned round today and said “you must now do this for no payment, but for the good of the country, there would be no IDF tomorrow.

      Reply to Comment
      • Kolumn8

        You have no idea what you are talking about. Hamas pays salaries. Hamas pays its ‘civilian employees’ salaries and it pays them well.. Hamas pays its soldiers more than Israeli conscripts get paid. There goes that theory, huh?

        Reply to Comment
    4. Whiplash

      Reznic belonged to the left wing, feminist, peace party Ratz in the 1970s. Ratz merged with Meretz in 1997.

      It is to be expected that someone from the far left would identify with the Palestinian terrorist movement as underdogs fighting occupation.

      When she speaks about understanding the need of oppressed people in America and other countries to resist and form underground forces until they obtain sovereignty, is she saying that such groups can use any and all means? Such thinking would mean that she supports Al-Qaeda who wanted Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries freed from American occupation forces, ISIS who is fighting occupation forces of the wrong type of Muslims and Christians, the FLQ which kidnapped and bombed people, East Indian terrorist groups which blew up Air India flight 182 killing 329 people, mainly Canadians. Then there are Palestinian terror groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others who want to eradicate Israel to obtain sovereignty over all Israel and kill all Jews, which incidentally includes her.

      I wonder if she understands the needs of decent thinking people to defend themselves against such terrorists.

      Reply to Comment
      • Eliza

        Give it up Whiplash – All the retired terrorist is saying is that she understands the impulse of occupied (or oppressed people) to resist. Sometimes this resistance takes a violent form. The oppressors generally call those who resist ‘terrorists’.

        Perhaps the most famous ‘terrorist’ is Nelson Mandela.

        BTW, no-one is trying to kill all Jews. But those who suffer and continue to suffer under Israeli domination, will not forget. They may well forgive – but not forget.
        Many Jews, (Israeli and others)support the right of Palestinians to full civil/human rights and are horrified at what Zionism has done to Israel. I know you don’t agree but there is no point to demolishing straw man arguments.

        Reply to Comment
        • Stan Nadel

          Eliza, read the Hamas Charter and the statements of Hamas leaders–they want to kill Jews, not just Israelis, and are quite open about that.

          Reply to Comment
    5. Gustav

      I understand the need of Palestinian Arabs to want to end the occupation.

      What I don’t unerstand is their pathological desire to end the right of self determination of the Jewish people in Israel.

      If the Palestinian Arabs would not insist on the latter, there would not be a need for the former (there would not be occupation). In fact, a Palestinian Arab state could have come into existence many times, from as early as 1948.

      That is the difference between the other freedom fighters which Ms Reznik listed and the so called Palestinian Arab freedom fighters who want to rob Jewish Israelis from freedom.

      Reply to Comment
    6. Average American

      I am very pleased to see Begin and Shamir named as leaders of the Jewish terrorist group Irgun. As leaders of it, of course they are terrorists themselves. I am also pleased to see it recognized that they moved to the office of prime minister, bringing their Irgun mindset with them, and continuing it there. And continuing it with every prime minister since then. Because all prime ministers are dutied to carry out the Zionist charter of Israel, just as was Irgun. I have no respect for the government of Israel. If the people of Israel are different from the government, I haven’t seen evidence of it.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        No the people of Israel are no different from our government. After all, we elected our government and they represent us.

        You on the other hand are different from most other Americans because of your hate for us. Most other Americans on the other hand side with us rather than with Arabs.

        You know why? Because Arabs hate Americans. They show their hatred to you time and time again. They showed their hatred of Americans in Beirut, in tripoli, in Iraq, on September 11 in Texas and by their support of ISIS.

        In fact, I don’t even think you are an American, let alone an Average American. Otherwise you wold not support Arabs. Judging by your persistently stupid comments, you are most probably an Arab yourself.

        Reply to Comment
        • Average American

          It’s not hatred, it’s recognizing you for what you are, expansionists in the name of a race-defined nation (hmm where have we seen that before?), fulfilling your Zionist charter. “You” meaning, as you just confirmed, the government and the people. USA recognizes other governments and people for what they are and still supports them for one reason or another. For example, USA supports Saudi Arabia for the reason of oil. What is the reason USA should support Israel?

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            What is the reason USA should support Israel?

            You tell me, Average Arab.

            But in my opinion, the US sides more with Israel (not completely) than with the Palestinian Arabs because:

            1. During the cold war, the Palestinian Arabs and many other Arab nations were firmly on the side of the enemies of the USA (the USSR).

            2. As I said above, the Arabs committed hostile acts against the USA in:

            – Beirut
            – Tripoli
            – September 11
            – Afghanistan
            – Iraq
            – Kenya
            – Fort Worth Texas

            And many other places.

            3. Israel on the other hand sided with the USA during the cold war. For instance, it passed on captured Soviet radars and even a mig fighter plane for analysis. Usefull stuff eh?

            So why exactly should the US ditch an old ally in favor of a people (the Arabs) who obviously hate America and Americans? Just because the Soviets have disappeared? In your dreams, Average Arab.

            Reply to Comment
          • Average American

            Gustav, you offer one reason why USA should support Israel: Israel helped us in the 1950s in the cold war with a couple of things. Why should USA support Israel now, currently, is the question. We don’t have to ditch you in order to support Saudi Arabia, we can just ditch you. You are the regional superpower, that’s what you wanted, so you can stand on your own now. Why should we support you?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            No, dude, we helped America, many times till the collapse of the Soviet Union, till the 1980s. And yes, America helped us too but sometimes it didn’t but that’s ok too.

            But when exactly did the Palestinian Arabs help America? C’mon, you can say it, Average Arab, repeat after me: N-E-V-E-R, right?

            So only an idiot, or a self interested Arab like you, would advocate dropping an old ally in favor of an old enemy (Palestinian Arabs) who did nothing but harm to America and still has only hatred and contempt for Americans.

            Reply to Comment
          • Eliza


            You say ‘So only an idiot or self-interested Arab like you, would advocate dropping an old ally in favour of an old enemy’.

            Truth be told, all nation states act in their perceived national interest, regardless of old favours or past differences.

            The USA political elite (except nutcase T-baggers) are increasingly seeing Israel as a strategic liability. The USA will dump Israel, ever so politely and behind the scenes, if and when its continued support is seen as being untenable. Growing popular rejection of Israeli tactics regarding the Palestinians will increasingly make this change domestically popular. That’s the real point.

            Not all the brownie points in the world will alter this. Israel is a client state of the USA and the USA does not have a good history regarding standing by its client states once they cease to be of use.

            Far better for Israel’s long term survival to try and gain respect and acceptance from its near neighbours. This means loosening the hold on Palestinians, whether by way of a one or two state solution. Right now, Israel has one ally – the USA; maybe Germany given holocaust guilt. That’s all.

            Nobody really cares if Israel exists or not; equally no-one wants Israeli Jews to be harmed or to live without full human and civil rights. Its just we want Palestinians also to have those rights.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Good post, Eliza. At least, unlike some others here your post is well reasoned and you make some valid points. It warrants me addressing it point by point.

            “Truth be told, all nation states act in their perceived national interest, regardless of old favours or past differences.”

            Very true and we are well aware of it. In fact the very knowledge of this fact influences our policies. For instance, we don’t consider verbal or written assurances given to us about anyone’s commitment to ensure our survival. We know we can only rely on ourselves to ensure that. That is why we will never accept vulnerable borders no matter what guarantees we may be given.

            “The USA political elite (except nutcase T-baggers) are increasingly seeing Israel as a strategic liability. The USA will dump Israel, ever so politely and behind the scenes, if and when its continued support is seen as being untenable.”

            It may or may not happen. At the least we are not blind to that possibility. But don’t write off our usefulness to the USA too soon. I don’t think we are anywhere near the point of parting yet.

            “Growing popular rejection of Israeli tactics regarding the Palestinians will increasingly make this change domestically popular. That’s the real point.”

            Again, a bit of it may be happening. There isn’t any doubt that the Arabs are getting some very savvy PR consultants who devised quite an effective strategy to tug on the emotions of a section of the American public. But we have plenty of good friends left. Don’t write us off just yet.

            “Not all the brownie points in the world will alter this.”

            Again you are right but not completely. I think we still are and will remain for many years very useful to America. Whether policy makers like us or are indifferent to us (I won’t include a small minority of haters), they are pragmatic enough to realize that Israel is America’s only reliable ally in the Middle East. All political shades of past Israeli governments were staunchly in the Amerian camp. Of course, so were/are a small number of Arab regimes. I stress the word small. But American policy makers are not stupid (most of them). They know that no Arab/Muslim regime is secure. They are prone literally overnight to turn from staunch allies to deadly enemies of the US. Do you doubt it? Then just look at what happened in Iran after their revolution. Under the Shah, they were friends for many years. Then overnight they turned into a frenzied mob who shout “death to America” at every opportunity. Yes, I know that Iranians are not Arabs. But the Arabs behavior is no different.

            “Israel is a client state of the USA and the USA does not have a good history regarding standing by its client states once they cease to be of use.”

            Yes and no. Show me which long standing ally did the USA ditch? Having said that, we would be foolish to ignore the possibility that you mention. And rest assured that we don’t ignore it.

            “Far better for Israel’s long term survival to try and gain respect and acceptance from its near neighbours.”

            The only way that will happen is after we will be able to convince them that the cost to themselves of getting rid of us would be so horrendous that they won’t be willing to pay that cost. So far, we have not managed to convince them of that fact because they see us as just another spineless western enclave which they will eventually wear out. After which they hope to kick us in our collective back sides and get us to run away with our tails behind our legs.

            They are dead wrong of course. If they would be better students of history, they would realize what a stubborn and resourceful people we are. That is why we haven’t disappeared as a people while much mightier nations melted away.

            “This means loosening the hold on Palestinians, whether by way of a one or two state solution.”

            If you are talking about the two state solution, you are addressing the wrong party. We were the ones who were for that concept from the word go. The Arabs on the other hand were the ones to openly reject it till quite recently. Some now pretend to accept it, the likes of Hamas still reject it. And don’t tell me that Hamas does not count.

            As for the one state solution, I have two words to say about it: Forget it!

            “Right now, Israel has one ally – the USA; maybe Germany given holocaust guilt. That’s all.”

            I totally disagree. We have many more allies in lots of places. And we will have more. Sure, some of them play a double game because like you say, countries are self interested and they play both sides when they can. The Arabs have oil to offer. We have other things to offer. And as time goes on, we will even become competitive with the Arabs in that field. Haven’t you heard of the vast natural gas fields that were discovered near our shores? Those will gradually come on line.

            “Nobody really cares if Israel exists or not; equally no-one wants Israeli Jews to be harmed or to live without full human and civil rights. Its just we want Palestinians also to have those rights.”

            I wouldn’t say “nobody” either way. But overall, you are right. That is why, we know that ultimately we can only rely on ourselves. We learnt that lesson the hard way about 70 years ago in Europe. Rest assured, it isn’t lost on us and we factor it in, as I mentioned above.

            Reply to Comment
          • Guy L.

            Average American-
            Didn’t Begin sign the peace treaty with Egypt, giving back the Sinai?

            Can you please explain how that fits in with the “Zionist Charter”?
            I don’t think you got a chance to talk to too many Israelis. I’m guessing that you only interacted with the extremist, uber-nationalistic part and this is what your paradigm is based on.

            And by the way- the US rather fits a description of a race driven, expantionistic nation. Manifest Destiny, White Man’s Burden and so on.
            Once you’re done correcting the historic evils Committed by the Zionists, will the next step be bringing justice to the Americas by giving back New England, California, New Mexico, Texas, and most of the midwest back to the native americans?

            Reply to Comment
          • Average American

            Guy L, yes Begin the Irgun terrorist. Thank you for identifying unbidden that the Sinai is part of The Land Of Israel, the magical land imagined by Zionists who formed Israel to expand into all of that Land for the race of The Jews exclusively. Regarding North America, there was no single race that conquered it, and it was not conquered for the benefit of a single race, and our flag didn’t display the emblem of a single race (Star of David), and we didn’t name the place The White States Of America after a single race (like The Jewish State of Israel).

            Reply to Comment
          • Guy L.

            Begin was a terrorist that turned into a head of state. Just like Arafat, or George Washington, or several other leaders I can think of.

            Honestly- you kinda lost me in the “magical land of Zionism” part. The Sinai was conquered by Israel in 67, and was returned to Egypt as a part of a peace process in the early 80’s. I don’t need to unbiddingly admit it, it written in a lot of history books. The Sinai is not a part of Israel…

            Some criticism of Israel is justified and in place, but yours I’m afraid is a borderline conspiracy theory. Putting aside the West Bank (where Israel’s actions should be criticized), Israel doesn’t act like a warmongering expansionistic savage. It has signed a peace treaty with two neighbouring states, gave back a large chunk of land, and at times was prepared to give up some more.
            I’d love to know where you get your “greater Israel/Irgun-zionistic charter” stuff from. Can you point out s few sources?

            As far as North America goes- there are millions of Native Americans and Africans that would disagree with you. Coming to think of it, there are also millions of Americans who would disagree with you as well.

            Reply to Comment
          • Average American

            Guy L, yes Theodore Herzl and Yitzak Shamir.

            Reply to Comment
    7. William Burns

      At the time, it would have been the King’s soldiers, not the Queen’s.

      Reply to Comment
    8. andrew r

      Even though I was only a teenager, the danger did not deter me. (…) During vacations, we underwent live fire training and ground exercises. The lessons took place in a kindergarten located in Tel Aviv’s Florentine neighborhood

      I’m going to remember this the next time someone attempts to justify the IDF shooting of Palestinian minors by claiming they were “encouraged” to confront the soldiers or were being used by militants. Or for that matter, the next time someone claims Hamas uses civilian structures for military purposes.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        So, Andrew?

        What is your point again?

        Our point is this:

        1. If weapons are stored in civilian areas, then those areas automatically become military targets.

        2. If shooting occurs from civilian areas, then those areas become military targets.

        3. If a military surrounds those military areas and attempts to neutralize those targets but it’s occupants resist and fire. Then those targets can be neutralised by military means.

        The above apply to eveyone. Be they Jewish, Muslim, Arab, Israeli or anyone else.

        Anything else you want to say Andrew?

        Reply to Comment
        • Still not convinced, sorry.

          G: “1. If weapons are stored in civilian areas, then those areas automatically become military targets.”

          The principle of distinction still applies e.g. that Hamas has stored weapons in empty UN schools does not “automatically” make it open-season on UN schools that are being used as shelters.

          Reply to Comment
        • Still not convinced, sorry

          “2. If shooting occurs from civilian areas, then those areas become military targets.”

          The principle of proportionality still applies e.g. if shooting is emanating from areas where civilians are located then the civilian death toll can not exceed the anticipated military advantage from returning fire.

          That’s pretty obvious, otherwise the IDF would respond to every Palestinian demonstration by firing into the crowd…. oh, yeah, sorry, silly me…..

          Reply to Comment
        • Again, still not convinced

          “3. If a military surrounds those military areas and attempts to neutralize those targets but it’s occupants resist and fire. Then those targets can be neutralised by military means.”

          Well, heck, the principle of distinction and the principle of proportionality still applies in that situation.

          You see, it all depends on “what targets” you mean when you say “those targets”.

          The IDF seems to be run by Humpty Dumpty, a fellow who once said “when I use a word it means exactly what I want it to mean, neither more nor less”.

          You too, apparently.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            @Still Not Convinced

            Yea right, why would you be convinced? I mean if you don’t want to be convinced then you just won’t be convinced, will ya?

            Now tell me this. Where was I talking about the IDF in particular? I was talking about the rules of war in general.

            As far as the rules of proportionality, that is pretty subjective isn’t it? And you might also want to convince me that what the IDF does in general is somehow more disproportional than what the following other fighting forces do in similar battles which they fought.

            1. NATO in Iraq
            2. NATO in Afghanistan
            3. NATO in Serbia
            4. Russia in Georgia
            5. Russia in Chechnia
            6. Assad in Syria
            7. Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka

            Get the drift? Want me to go on?

            Now, did I hear you sounding off against them? … I am listening …

            Oh and while you are at it, what about Hamas? Or Islamic Jihad? Or even the PLO? Nah, I am sure you have no complaints against them. After all they are the annointed ones. They are allowed to do anything as long as they are being “occupied”. That’s why they are too busy knocking back any peace offer or cease fire which comes their way because it does not give them 100% of what they want (read no more Israel). while at the same time it gives them a fig leaf to allow them to break all rules of warfare, at least in the eyes of you lot. I do admit, the rest of us are not so forgiving, go figure.

            Reply to Comment
        • andrew r

          Okay, this is my point: Based on the propaganda we are fed today by Israel and its fellow-travelers, the British didn’t have to search for the illegal weapons the Yishuv armed groups were hiding in civilian areas. They could have merely carpet bombed these settlements in order to destroy the explosive shells, grenades, etc. after warning the residents to get out with phone calls and “knock on the roof” missiles.

          It’s not relevant if the residents were canny enough to allow the British to search the premises when they did show up. The fact they were using synagogues and farms as hiding places to begin with means Israel’s proponents in the western world fail the hypocrisy test. They want to convey the impression that Israelis (read: Jews) respect human life enough to separate combatants and civilians when that is not how they were fighting for statehood in the late 40’s.

          Reply to Comment
          • Whiplash

            Andrew: Learn a little history, eh.

            The British did not have to search Jewish enclaves. They could have bombed them. In fact the RAF had requested and received permission to bomb Jewish enclaves from which Jewish forces operated. However the RAF was not able to find these enclaves from which Jewish forces operated and therefore were not able to bomb them.

            Now if the Haganah or Irgun had used Jewish communities to fire rockets, mortars, anti-tank missiles like the Gazans use their communities, the British could have located the firing locations and bombed those areas. They did this in other locations.

            The RAF in Malaya were able to locate terrorist enclaves and dropped some 33 million pounds of bombs on communist positions which had been identified.

            The RAF in Kenya was also able to identify terrorist positions in Kenya and bombed their villages with Howards causing mass panic.

            However, in Mandate Palestine the British were unable to locate the bases and were forced to carry out mass arrests and intimidation of Jewish Agency individuals and kibbutz members while looking for members of Jewish Defense organizations.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            I’ll keep it short, Andrew.

            1. Your reference to carpet bombing. Are you saying Israel carpet bombed Gaza? If so you are ignorant. Are you aware what are the consequences to life and limb if there is carpet bombing? Hint, think of Dresden.

            2. Your claim that it isn’t relevant whether residents allowed the Brits to search premises, or resisted, they could be carpet bombed. You say that carpet bombing was a ligitimate option for the British but you squeal about Gaza? Well then what can one say?

            3. Jewish hypocrisy about hiding weapons in civilian areas? When were we hypocritical about that? Which history book written even by Zionist historians denied that we did it too?

            All we are saying is that once some group, any group, does that, there are consequences. If there is no resistance to the army who wants to search those sites, the consequences are (or should be) less severe. If there is fierce resistance, then the army has gotta do whit it’s gotta do.

            Reply to Comment
          • andrew r


            1. Shujaya for one looks like the aftermath of a Dresden or Guernica-type carpet bombing.

            2. Don’t suppose you noticed the phrase, “Based on the propaganda we are fed today by Israel and its fellow-travelers” It’s called playing devil’s advocate in this language.

            3. A single-celled organism can understand what I’m discussing is an uncomfortable subject for Israel’s amen corner. That’s why it’s in the books and not US media.


            I have to admit, that would’ve been an asskicking rebuttal if I asserted the Z-armed groups were firing off their ammunition or that the British never remotely contemplated using air power against them. Of course my essential point still remains.

            Also, could there be a reason the Brits never found the underground groups’ bases. Perhaps this reason is related to what I was going on about two posts above.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “Shujaya for one looks like the aftermath of a Dresden or Guernica-type carpet bombing.”

            Yea right Andrew.

            Casualty rates in Dresden ranged from 35,000 through 100,000, and even up to half a million.

            How many dead and injured in the whole of Gaza? You tell us Andrew.

            As for the rest of my rebuttal, a single cell organism would understand exactly how it negates your complaints. But not you Andrew. Is it due to lack of equipment you have in that thing you call your head? Or is it because you just don’t want to understand?

            Oh well, whatever, I don’t really care.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Now Andrew,

            Seeing that you tried, unsuccessfully to apply the hypocrisy test to us, let me apply the stupidity test to you.

            Are you saying that since Hamas has been shooting it’s rockets at Israeli civilians from civilian neighborhoods in Gaza, for the last 15 years, Israel is not allowed to shoot back?

            Is that what you are saying, Andrew?

            Reply to Comment
          • andrew r

            Oh well, whatever, I don’t really care.

            That says it all, but just for fun, here’s an example of what I’m talking about:

            “…that the people unfortunately were living in a military zone where Hamas had turned civilian neighborhoods into places where they store weapons and explosives…” (0:55)

            It’s all fine and dandy that when confronted, you can admit the Yishuv was subject to the same consequences for embedding their military objects in urban areas. I’d like to see how Regev would handle it on TV. His job is to assume a moral highground that requires ignorance of how the founders of his second country behaved when it was expedient.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            The interviewer in your you- tube video is an arse hole. He denied that Hamas rules by the gun and intimidate dissenters as well as journalists. Contrary to the title, Regev was not on the ropes. The interviewer was an arrogant pompous hypocrite who had preconceived notions and set out to prove them hell or shine. He tried to put words into the mouth of Regev which Regev did not say. All Regev said was that nothing that is said by witnesses intimidated by totalitarian regimes need to be taken with a grain of salt.

            The interviewer then tried to insist that Regev claimed that Hamas used phosphorus bombs on their own people. Regev said nothing of the sort. What he did say, is that Hamas could have concocted evidence and intimidated witnesses to make claims to support such evidence.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Here, read the link below and see how Hamas intimidate Gazan protesters:


            “GAZA CITY — Hamas has been shooting Palestinians to quell unrest in the Gaza Strip. Palestinian sources said Hamas has been killing Palestinians suspected of sparking protests amid the war with Israel. They said more than 50 people have been killed, most of them accused of spying for Israel.

            Everybody is terrified to talk about this because they still control the streets,” a source said.”

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Oh and again, Andrew, I notice that you declined to answer my previous post regarding the stupidity test, what a surprise. But I’ll give you a second chance to answer it:

            Are you saying that since Hamas has been shooting it’s rockets at Israeli civilians from civilian neighborhoods in Gaza, for the last 15 years, Israel is not allowed to shoot back?

            Is that what you are saying, Andrew?

            It really is a simple question, Andrew. You can answer it with either a ‘yes’, or a ‘no’ and you can leave it at that or you can elaborate. Do you think you can do it?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Oh and that old chestnut again, the use of white phosphorus by the IDF. The same allegations were made against the US army in the battle of Falujah in Iraq. Here, read about it:


            “On November 9, 2005 the Italian state-run broadcaster Radiotelevisione Italiana S.p.A. aired a documentary titled “Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre”, alleging that the United States’ used white phosphorus as a weapon in Fallujah causing insurgents and civilians to be killed or injured by chemical burns.”

            Anyone knows what was the outcome of the UN investigations about those claims? No?

            Reply to Comment
    9. Mikesailor

      Therefore, Gustav, if a Palestinian blew himself up on a bus and the bus contained at least one soldier, then it wasn’t a “terrorist” attack but a legitimate act of war. Otherwise you label yourself a slimy hypocritical war criminal. We know already you are intellectually dishonest but give someone enough rope….

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        You are a slow learner, aren’t you Mikey?

        Read my point 3 again. Here is the relevant sentence from it:

        “….but it’s occupants resist and fire …”

        In your example, did the soldier resist and fire on your suicide bomber? Did your suicide bomber warn the civilians to get out of the way before he blows himself up? If not, then he is a war criminal. Of course if he does warn them and they don’t listen then he is within his rights to attack military targets.

        Those are the rules of war Mikey. I didn’t make those rules. I am just the messenger. You don’t like those rules? Go and complain to the UN. I am sire they will make up special rules that you will approve of which would require Israel only to abide by your special rules. While you and they will exempt Hamas.

        In the meanwhile though, both sides have to obey the same rules of war.

        Reply to Comment
        • idle

          are you sure that those are the general war rule?on what earth had you pick them,fakester?from that so-called jerk IDF (never been recognised by human being) heh??have you got any idea about the Geneva Convention which is internationally spread among??either from the prohibition of certain weapons that may cause unnecessary suffering,or about the civilian targeted, etc????
          “You don’t like those rules? Go and complain to the UN”
          pathetic Gustav..unfortunately we even don’t like the UN either..of its stance,sided..it never vindicates the peace and truth lovers..you have to know it well not from the side of wrongdoers..
          you and your people,together along with your stands are shunned,loser!!
          oh..i would like to make it clear..i’m referring “your people” as the zionist. full-stop. not all the Jews, or else you’ll censure me with such mildew accusation as anti-Semit..yawn

          Reply to Comment
          • Whiplash

            Idle, maybe you not Gustav needs to review the Geneva Conventions on the Protection of civilians. The convention provides that protected areas lose their status if used for purposes to advance the military advantage of the other side. The rule of proportionality still applies, but that rule is how much force needs to be applied to attain the military objective not how many are killed or how much destruction is caused.

            Please also note that the IDF has not used any specified prohibited weapon in this war against Gazans.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “are you sure that those are the general war rule?on what earth had you pick them,fakester?”

            I suppose you prefer the rules of war which ISIS and their brothers, Hamas, follow, right Idle?

            Reply to Comment
    10. Mikesailor

      Gustav: Is bombing the residence of a “Hamas” operative thereby killing an untold number of civilians your idea of “resistance” under your silly #3? How about throwing grenades in dwellings you know are only occupied by civilians? Sharon did the latter and the bomber pilot who assassinated Sheik Yassin did the former. But I forget, under the Gustav theory of war only non-Jews can be guilty of war crimes. Isn’t that right? Try reading the Fourth Geneva Convention sometime. Remember, the one that Israel signed and proceeded to roundly ignore to this day? Why be afraid of the ICC if you have nothing to hide?

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        Try and look at this and then tell me why what Israel does is worse?

        “At least 35 people were reportedly killed over the weekend in Yemen, as a series of air strikes hit the country, including the biggest reported drone strike of the year so far.

        Multiple sources including military officials and eyewitnesses described how a US drone attacked a truck that was carrying alleged members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and also hit a vehicle carrying civilians. At least 10 – and possibly as many as 21 – were reportedly killed in the attack, including at least three civilians. They were described as ‘construction workers‘ or ‘labourers’ by some reports.”

        But I forget, under the Mikesailor theory of war only Jews can be guilty of war crimes. Isn’t that right?

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          Or maybe you prefer this type of warfare which your Arabs seem to like, Mikesailor?

          “The pictures on a militant website appear to show masked fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, loading the captives onto flatbed trucks before forcing them to lie face-down in a shallow ditch with their arms tied behind their backs. The final images show the bodies of the captives soaked in blood after being shot.”

          I am sure you don’t think of that as a warcrime Mikesailor, because Arabs fight like that, not Jews? Right Mikey?

          Reply to Comment
    11. Philos

      About the British in Palestine.

      The fact is that they were restrained by the Holocaust, by their shameful behaviour before the war and during. This meant that the British public was sympathetic to the Jews plight and the government didn’t have that domestic or international political capital to repress the Jewish insurrection groups. If we do a mind game and imagine the British response to the Irgun and others without the Holocaust then it would have been as vicious and unrestrained as in Ireland. I say Ireland because there was no way the British colonial authorities were going to be as indiscriminate and brutal to fellow European colonialists as they had to been to the Arabs a decade previously when they slaughtered almost 10,000 Palestinians during the Arab Revolt.

      You see ladies and gentlemen, the comparison is facile. Under British rule the Jews were ‘people’; that is, they were white. They could not be gunned down in the streets or their towns indiscriminately bombed like Asians, Africans or Arabs.

      Btw, it’s indicative of Zionism being in the tradition of British colonial racism (although not the same thing) that someone above called the Kenyan Mau Mau freedom fighters ‘terrorists.’ Especially after the UK state was forced to admit that it systematically tortured and murdererd them and must pay, by court order, damages to former Mau Mau fighters who survived the British prisons.

      Reply to Comment
      • Whiplash

        Philos, come again, the British felt restrained by their actions in the Holocaust? Not likely. The British showed no sympathy to war survivors and incarcerated them in concentration and transit camps in Europe. The Americans urged them to send 100,000 survivors to Mandate Palestine in furtherance of the objects of the Mandate of Palestine. They refused because they did not want to offend the Arab regimes in the middle east.

        The British tried to crush the Jewish Defense forces as they had crushed the Arab rebellion. The Yishuv did not buckle under indiscriminate British attacks on Jewish communities. The Jewish Yishuv did not break rank and run to the nearest Arab capital as Arabs had done during the disturbances in 1936 to 1939. Jewish Defense Forces proved to be more than a match for British soldiers.

        The British tried arresting the bulk of the Jewish Agency only to be out maneuvered by Golda Meir, a school teacher and labor leader, and David Ben Gurion and the Haganah.

        The British had 100,000 troops in Mandate Palestine and they could not control it. They could not afford the humiliation or the expense so they packed their bags and left.

        Reply to Comment
    12. Mikesailor

      Gus: How quickly you change the subject and avoid answering. Old hasbarista trick which really doesn’t work. There are many countries and armed groups guilty of war crimes. Including, I might add, my government for the unprovoked war against Iraq. Yet, that still doesn’t let Israel off the hook no matter how hard you try to excuse their actions. You remmind me of a cuckholded lover who still believes everything his unfaithful partner says, no matter what his “lying” eyes may see. Forst deny, then try to divert, then get angry with the truth etc.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        Interesting how you were so ready to accept that America, your supposed country, commits war crimes but you ignored my other post which was illustrating how Arabs fight. They are even worse than us and America, don’t you think Mikey?

        So why the urgency to pick on us but not on Hamas and other Arabs? What kind of trick is that Mikey? Could it be Taqiya? Are you sure you are not of Arab descent Mikey?

        Reply to Comment
        • Average American

          Gustav, some of the differences between America and Israel is America isn’t named for a specific race (it’s not The White States of America like The Jewish State of Israel), and and it doesn’t have a government post for a specific race (State Rabbi), and it doesn’t have on its flag the symbol of a specific race (the Star of David).

          Reply to Comment
    13. Mark

      Israel welcomed Ethiopian jews. There was never any steralisation. Democracy where both sides can live in peace is all Israel wants and has offered it over and over but you cannot make peace for all when it is taught in schools to hate Jews and that there will be no peace until all the jews have been thrown into the sea. The land of Gaza was free and prosperous, money was given in abundance to help these people. It was all taken and used by terrorist to build tunnels with one intention… Terrorism.

      Reply to Comment
    14. Click here to load previous comments