+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

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

The road out of the occupation runs through the Nakba

As long as Israelis deny, distort and repress the expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians, we will never truly accept and absorb the end of the occupation.

Graffiti seen on a wall in the depopulated Palestinian village Lifta, depopulated Palestinian village of Lifta, located on the edge of West Jerusalem. The graffiti reads: 'Lifta takes revenge on Arabs.' (photo: Natasha Roth)

Graffiti seen on a wall in the depopulated Palestinian village Lifta, located on the edge of West Jerusalem. The graffiti reads: ‘Lifta takes revenge on Arabs.’ (photo: Karen Zack)

It is difficult to find a view in Lifta that isn’t marred by the words ‘death to Arabs’ graffitied in Hebrew on its hollow buildings. Someone even took the trouble to write it in drying cement at the entrance to the site, ensuring that it will always be one of the first things visitors see. The leftovers of a Palestinian village that was depopulated over the course of a few months at the end of 1947 and the beginning of 1948, Lifta’s empty, crumbling houses are spattered across a valley just outside Jerusalem, each ruin a sign of violence that has come and gone.

It is the most well-preserved of hundreds of remnants of the Nakba — the dispossession of over 750,000 Palestinians and the destruction of over 400 villages during the 1948 war — that tattoo the Israeli landscape, exit wounds from a history we have barricaded out of our lives. Yet these buildings linger at the sides of our roads, as does their meaning at the edge of our consciousness, sinkholes that threaten to consume our self-perception if we stray too close. Small wonder that the racist slogans came out; better to stem the leak at its source.

The problem, at least from the perspective of large parts of the Israeli mainstream, is that these leaks are indicative of a wellspring that will continue to bubble up as long as it is not addressed head-on. There is an underlying, pervasive and unipolar attitude in Israeli society about why we are here, how we got here, and what we are doing (and have done) here. It is an attitude that dictates all the unacknowledged elements of abuse, and which enables the more explicit expressions of racism that dominate the public sphere. And it is an attitude that is inextricably rooted in 1948, and the denial of what those events still mean.

The 1967 occupation — and the motivation behind it — would not have been possible without 1948. The mentality of those who support and enable the occupation lives in an ideology that was birthed at the same time as the State of Israel. As long as we deny, distort and repress the Nakba, Israelis will never truly accept and absorb the end of the occupation. We will not have faced up to the reality of the roads we drive on, the parks and forests we visit, the dwellings we inhabit. Without that understanding, Israel will never be ready to make the necessary sacrifices for addressing the consequences of that history and its living ideology.

The depopulated Palestinian village Dana, 2010 (photo: Palestinian Nakba village Qula, 2010 (photo: Noga Kadman / Zochrot.org)

The depopulated Palestinian village Dana, 2001 (photo: Noga Kadman / Zochrot.org)

Whether in the desecration of one the few intact shrines to a society that once was, or the ease and desperation with which we end the lives of those who challenge us to examine ourselves, the maintenance of the status quo here relies on utterly denying Palestinians the basic elements of being human: the right to be recognized as individuals; the right to grieve; the right to agency; the right to move, speak up and cry out. The right to a history that is not undermined, suppressed, distorted, abused, denied and ridiculed in order to maintain a clear flight-path for our own narrative.

“I am afraid of a history that has only one narrative,” confesses the main character in Elias Khoury’s novel, Gate of the Sun. He is right to be afraid, for in creating the State of Israel – with all the attendant myth-making and containment that followed — we may have saved our bodies, but we let go of our souls. We can clean the graffiti from Lifta, we can condemn the repeated killings of Palestinians by Israeli security forces, but until we air the historical attitudes and realities that make such violence possible, the destruction will persist. And so will the conflict, no matter how many hands we shake and pieces of paper we sign.

Newsletter banner

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
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. Bruce Gould

      “Israel, the original terrorist state”:

      http://tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/189264/israel-original-terrorist-state

      Today, the phrase “Palestinian terrorism” immediately conjures up Arab violence against Jews—suicide bombings in buses or restaurants, Hamas rockets launched from the Gaza Strip. Seventy years ago, however, a reader who encountered those words in a headline would have thought of terrorism not against Jews but by them. From 1944 until 1947, Palestine witnessed a series of assassinations, abductions, and bombings, perpetrated by Jewish terrorists against the occupying British.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        And before all that, there was the Arab revolt of the 1920s and 30s in which Jews were attacked and murdered randomly by Arab militias. And events like the 1929 massacre of Hebron’s Jews.

        http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre

        But one will never catch our Bruce Gould types talking about such events will we? Why? Because they are one eyed people with an agenda to demonize the Jewish people while whitewashing their darlings; the Palestinian Arabs.

        Reply to Comment
      • Joel

        No, no Brucie.
        America is the original terrorist state. Colonial era Revolutionaries terrorized British Loyalists.
        During and after the American Civil War, Confederate Sympathizers were terrorized, particularly in the border states like, Kansas, Missouri and Tennessee.

        The KKK terrorized the American South for years.

        Wait a second. Wasn’t the Holodomor,Ukrainian famine in 1920’s, Soviet state terror?

        I’m confused Brucie.

        Reply to Comment
    2. jjj

      The Nakba is a minor event when compared to the tectonic events that shaped the world in WW2 and beyond. It is well over exaggerated and by far, the most maintained and heavily guarded conflicts in history, all with pure agenda of destroying Israel, and the hell with the lives of the refugees and their descendants.

      More Jews were deported from their homes, property, possessions an belongings than all Palestinians ever had. Many more people in Europe and Middles East were moved, transferred, deported, etc.

      Moreover, the Nakba tells of a ‘people of thieves’ stealing their country – where the facts are a bit different… The bottom line is that in light of the major hatred and harsh ideology of the Palestinians to throw the Jews to the sea, there is no way Israel could live with such hostile and life threating large population.
      Otherwise WW2 class ‘demolition’ from the Arabs would have taken place. This was their explicit and proclaimed intention.
      So, the Nakba, even though brutal to everyday life and immoral on the personal level, was probably the least of all worsts that could have happen.
      Naturally, this does not justify a single war crime perpetrated, e.g., rape, murder, and the such. Many families fled due to fear, many due to calls to make room for Arab invasion, etc. The fact is they were not allowed to return.

      And finally, the famous 194 decision of the UN, which the fraudulent BDS campaign now ironically calls for, was rejected by Palestinians and the Arab states, as they rejected the notion of the state of Israel that should have accepted them in the 1st place.

      The Nakba should be recognized, but there can be no real reconciliation unless Palestinians recognize Israel, at least in part, as the Jewish homeland, as well as the nation of all its citizens.

      Reply to Comment
      • Bruce Gould

        One of the reasons these discussions go on and on with no resolution is that some people think in terms of collective punishment and collective guilt (the Palestinians who were driven out of their homes in 48 were not the same people who drove the Jews out of various middle eastern countries – but if you think in terms of tribal identities and collective guilt that distinction will be meaningless to you), whereas other people don’t….it will all be down to whether BDS and international sanctions are effective or not.

        https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/17928–victory-for-palestinian-led-boycott-campaign-as-veolia-sells-israel-assets

        Reply to Comment
        • Ben

          Nice observation. Bruce you put your finger on the habits of thought that prevent people moving forward to a rational final status agreement between Palestine and Israel. Life is a series of habits interrupted by a few thoughts, someone said. One of the reasons I admire U.S. President Barack Obama is his ability to discard old habits of thought and realize when old thinking is getting in the way, when yesterday’s solutions become today’s problems, think afresh and move forward, against the stream. Think “Cuba.” Think “Israel-Palestine” too. Yes, it will finally all come down to money doing the talking (BDS and international sanctions). Because actual talking will not work. With fanatics. Just read these pages, folks. But nothing on Earth talks like money. It was always thus and always will be. The same monetary forces that now have AIPAC driving U.S. senators before it in herd-like fear will have to be harnessed in the service of international sanctions against the occupation. Tis sad but true. This will only be applying the logic of Sheldon Adelson in reverse. Know thy enemy and arm oneself accordingly.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            But the Palestinian Arabs who carried the random murders of Jews in Palestine during the Arab revolt of the 1920s and 30s as well as the Hebron massacre WERE the same people who fled in the 1948 war which was a war of THEIR making.

            By the way, Bruce, the very nature of war involves collective punishment. That is why we don’t want wars but if the Palestinian Arabs as a people wage war on us, we fight back.

            Moreover, in every battle which your Palestinian Arabs waged on us, we too were collectively punished by them. Do you deny it? Then what do you call the random murder of Israelis in the 100 years of terror campaign which your Palestinian Arabs waged against us? You don’t call those murders and maimings collective punishment?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            You want solutions, Bruce? You want new thinking? Here is one solution for you…

            About 1 million Jews were driven out from Arab countries. All their properties and assets were confiscated. Most of those Jews from Arab lands settled in Israel.

            About 750,000 Palestinian Arabs became refugees in the Arab initiated 1948 war. Most of those Palestinian Arabs became residents of refugee camps in the same Arab countries from where Jews were driven out.

            So, there has been a defacto population exchange. Similar to the population exchange which took place in India and Pakistan when those countries were established. Both Pakistan and India took care of their own and neither side has a refugee problem today.

            Only the Arabs hang on to their grievances and refuse to take care of their refugees. Do you call that new thinking? Do you call that progressive thinking? Do you call that just?

            Isn’t it high time that those Arab countries should start integrating the Palestinian Arabs into their own societies? After all, they speak the same language, they practice the same religion (mostly Sunni Muslims) and they have the same culture. Don’t you think that would be a humane, just and practical solution, Bruce?

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Isn’t it high time the Israeli Jews started integrating their own, their settlers, back into Israeli society? Wouldn’t that be the humane, just and practical solution, Gustav? Why does any Israeli think he is entitled to Ariel?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            We were talking about the Nakba and the refugees.

            You suggested new thinking to solve old problems. Have you suddenly lost your appetite for it when you are confronted by practical solutions? Is that why you are trying to change the subject, Ben?

            Reply to Comment
      • andrew r

        there is no way Israel could live with such hostile and life threating large population.

        The problem with this sort of rant is that political Zionism began in 1897 and many of its leaders and functionaries anticipated a removal of the Arabs from the hypothetical Jewish state. They did not need the population exchange between Turkey-Greece, the removal of the Sudenten Germans post-WWII or anything that happened in the 20th century to get the idea. Their inspiration is what Jews went through at various times in England, Spain, Russia, etc combined with European colonialist violence. Herzl and his followers wanted to climb the ladder.

        So, the Nakba, even though brutal to everyday life and immoral on the personal level, was probably the least of all worsts that could have happen.

        Good point. If the Palestinians hadn’t fled, they would either have defeated the Jewish state by doing nothing or the Yishuv armed groups would have to escalate their warcrimes.

        as well as the nation of all its citizens.

        Just not those who were denied citizenship because they were out of the country during the establishment of the Israeli state (read: 1948 war).

        Reply to Comment
    3. Ben

      Gideon Levy’s account of a recent conference in Washington, “a completely unusual event…taking place at the National Press Club….”The Israel Lobby: Is It Good for the U.S.? Is It Good for Israel?”:

      “The student leaders, who are now on the frontline, spoke of the all-out war to silence them being waged by Jewish organizations on campus. It is presumably the rearguard action of Hillel International and its ilk: The destructiveness of the Zionist propaganda machine here will one day be exposed as a fatal error. It spurs more opposition than support.

      The ex-politicians also related how difficult it was to voice criticism of Israel. Paul Findley, 93, a Republican U.S. Representative from Illinois (from 1961-1983), mentioned a senior diplomat friend of his who knew it was impossible to criticize Israel to the secretary of state through the usual channels, only in one-on-one conversations. There are hundreds of people in the Administration whose salaries are paid by the U.S. taxpayer and who believe their sole mission is to defend Israel, even by destroying freedom of expression, Findley added. His voice shook when he said the conference was a rare opportunity to express such ideas. He spoke of the paralyzing fear of criticizing Israel, lest one be labeled an anti-Semite. It’s not the politicians who run this country; it’s the lobbyists, including the Jewish lobby, Findley said. His remarks were echoed by Nick Rahall, who served as a Democratic U.S. Representative from West Virginia for 38 years and who said American democracy had been hijacked by wealthy businessmen like Sheldon Adelson.

      Paul R. Pillar, formerly a senior member of the U.S. intelligence community, explained in a brilliant lecture the advantages of the nuclear agreement with Iran, and argued that Israel’s opposition to it stemmed from the fear that, in its wake, the occupation would become the main issue.”

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        Again Benny, the topic is the Nakba and refugees. Why are you trying to distract us from that discussion? Have you lost your appetite for new thinking? Weren’t you the one who chided us Zionists for not engaging in new thinking? I gave some new ideas to solve old problems and you are running away from it at 100 mph. Why?

        Look at you Benny. You are acting like a desperate panicking man who is trying to run away from some very important discussions which must take place to resolve old problems.

        Reply to Comment
        • Ben

          Oh I’m quite on topic! You must have lost your way enroute to the “capitulation and surrender to fascist occupation would be a swell idea I just can’t understand why they don’t get with that” board! Ok Gussie?

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Yes Brian, oops I mean Ben.

            Now look at the topic of this article. It is about the Nakba and the refugees. And you were yapping about how we Israelis need to have fresh thinking to solve old problems. But when I gave you some fresh thinking, about a just and practical way to resolve the refugee problem, you are running from it at 100mph.

            I guess my solution did not involve enough Israel bashing for you. That’s why it doesn’t appeal to you. Maybe you need to do some fresh thinking too, Benny?

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Ah hah. Hmmm. Puzzling. l assume by all this population exchange talk you are setting up the straw man of “they absolutely insist on 100% ROR, because they want to destroy us! So what’s a Jew to do? Of course, more settlements!” But the API and Abu Mazen’s true signals on this are all about “agreed upon solutions” which is code for a symbolic and dignity-preserving and politically feasible way to sell it to their people. Not the straw man of flooding Israel with scimitar-wielding blood thirsty Arabian conquerors. So what’s all this blather about population exchange? As an additional point, the israeli state urged and abetted those migrations of Jews, aka holy aliyah, going up, in many well organized overt and covert ways, so as to overwhelm the Arabs in Palestine, so you should cease and desist here with Levy Point # 2: Always The Victim.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “…not the straw man of flooding Israel with scimitar-wielding blood thirsty Arab conquerors”

            Did I say “scimitar-wielding”? My bad…

            I meant to say suicide-belt wearing homocidal maniacs. The same type who carried out attacks against us at the rate of about twice a week between 2001 and 2004 before we built the security wall. You know, that wall that you lot hate so much and the purpose of which you constantly misrepresent in your inimitable lying propagandist ways.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Ben:”I assume by all this population exchange talk you are setting up the straw man of “they absolutely insist on 100% ROR, because they want to destroy us”

            Never mind about what I am setting up. This is what Condi Rice wrote about Abbas’s reaction to Olmert’s proposal about the ROR…

            http://www.newsweek.com/condoleezza-rice-memoir-peace-process-anguish-68179

            “The next day I went to see Abbas and asked to see him in the little dining room adjacent to his office. I sketched out the details of Olmert’s proposal and told him how the prime minister wanted to proceed. Abbas started negotiating immediately. “I can’t tell four million Palestinians that only five thousand of them can go home,” he said.”

            …now, Benny, are you going to accuse Condi of setting up a “straw man”??

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Ben:”I assume by all this population exchange talk you are setting up the straw man of “they absolutely insist on 100% ROR, because they want to destroy us”

            Never mind about what I am setting up. This is what Condi Rice wrote about Abbas’s reaction to Olmert’s proposal about the ROR…

            http://www.newsweek.com/condoleezza-rice-memoir-peace-process-anguish-68179

            “The next day I went to see Abbas and asked to see him in the little dining room adjacent to his office. I sketched out the details of Olmert’s proposal and told him how the prime minister wanted to proceed. Abbas started negotiating immediately. “I can’t tell four million Palestinians that only five thousand of them can go home,” he said.”

            …now, Benny, are you going to accuse Condi of setting up a “straw man”?

            Reply to Comment
    4. Brien Duffy

      Your article, while attempting to portray angst, lacks a clear point other than posing a rhetorical question. The questions should be asked of the Palestinians: There will never be progress or justice until they recognize that they lost the war that led to the establishment of the state of the Jews. How did their clannishness and petty feuds prevent them from fighting to keep their land? Why didn’t the Arabs from the mountain villages that later became the West Bank participate in the 1948 fighting (other than a few near Gush Etzion and Hebron)? Why did the West Bank villages prevent the Palestinian refugees from moving into their villages and keep them in refugee camps? As Lova Eliav, who got thrown out of the Labour Party for being too leftist, once said: “We did to them what they did to us. Fortunately we won in 412 places and they one in just about a dozen. You know I am a peacenik. According to my conception, they don’t have any right of return and they never will. It would be the end of the Jewish state.”

      Reply to Comment
      • andrew r

        And what’s the clear point of this paragraph? It looks like you’re saying the Palestinians had one chance to fight Zionism effectively and since they blew it, they have to accept whatever terms are imposed on them.

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          Well, at the least, since the Palestinian Arabs lost the war which they started, they cannot impose terms on US.

          The Palestinian Arabs have two choices.

          1. They continue their war against us in which case the status quo continues.

          2. They negotiate and accept at least some of our terms.

          That’s the way of the world Andrew. The aggressors who lose wars have to compromise if they want to get anything from the victorious side.

          Reply to Comment
    5. Baladi Akka 1948

      I’m sorry but the writer is an “immigrant from England” i.e. a Jew who made aliyah and was allowed to settle only because of her ethnic-religious origins. Jews from around the world who come to squat in ’48 Palestine aka the State of Israel are part of the problem, it goes for some of the writers at 972 mag too. You think any Palestinians take you seriously ? Talking about the Nakba while you’re profiting on it…..

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        Thank you Baladi for showing those who care to look what we are up against.

        To you we are just squatters. And what do people do with squatters? They evict them. That is obviously still the intention of Arabs like you. The trouble is that we have something to say about that and what we have to do to make sure that you can’t keep your threat explains why things are the way they are. Normal people are beginning to understand that. Only the extreme lefties whom you obviously despise too (like us) are slow learners. Or more likely, it just does not suit them to learn.

        Reply to Comment
        • Baladi Akka 1948

          “Arabs like you’
          Yeah, I’ve already read some of you racist comments, but why don’t you take the shit out of your eyes before reading (and commenting), getting it out of your skull is a little harder.
          Of course, Jews ‘immigrating’ as adults are illégitimate from a Palestinian point of view: do you think any indigenous population would accept the supremacist Law of Return while their own Right of Return (embedded in international law) is denied ?
          You don’t have to answer, I don’t really care about your opinion, and I have no time to lose with people “like you”, that is right-wing Zionists.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            You gotta laugh.

            “Arabs like you” is no more racist than “a Jew who made Aliyah”.

            Unless of course our Baladi considers the term “Arab” racist. Which of course it isn’t. It describes an ethnicity. The guy is an idiot! Or more likely, he is a cunning little sod who wants to keep those who disagree with him on the back-foot with political correctness.

            Hey, Baladi, your tricks don’t work on me.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “Of course, Jews ‘immigrating’ as adults are illégitimate from a Palestinian point of view”

            And the problem is, folks? Well…? What is the problemo? I’ll tell anyone who has a semblance of normality….

            ….the problem is that the Baladis of this world know only one view in sight. The “Palestinian view” or more like “the Palestinian Arab” view because many of us Jews too were known as Palestinians before 1948. And going back further, our ancestors were known as Judeans or Hebrews.

            But our Baladi thinks that by repeating his lies that ONLY Palestinian Arabs were natives and even more outrageously that this is “Arab Land”, by repeating it often enough, it makes it true…

            …but it does NOT! What he refuses to open his mind to is that the history of humanity is strewn with migrations, invasions and colonizations. Yes, the Arab peoples did it too…

            …given the above history, our return to Zion (Palestine) which began around the mid 1800s, was fairly mild. Firstly, because we joined some of our brothers, Jews who never left. Secondly, because it was our ancestral homeland. Thirdly because the land was sparsely populated and there was room in there for us too. Fourthly, because it was not a sovereign Arab land for at least 1200 years. Fifthly, because we did not come to displace those who lived here, we came to live along side them, they in land allocated to them and we on land allocated and paid for by us. And by 1948, 33% of Palestinians were Jewish.

            It was the choice of the Palestinian Arabs to play a zero sum game and to try to deprive us of ANY land. That’s why the Nakba happened. They better learn from it and learn to share. Instead of thinking that once Arabs conquer a land (like Palestine) it becomes irrevocably Arab land. We have news for them. That is ONLY THEIR view. But other human beings have more balanced views and they should attempt to listen for a change…

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Blah blah blah. Two states. ’67 lines with swaps. Share Jerusalem. The rest is talk. Get on with it or suffer the consequences. You can’t have it all.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Ehud Barak offered the two states, Ehud Olmert offered the two states. They did not want it. The Palestinian Arabs want to be lord and masters of one state. An Arab state.

            So blah, blah, blah we cannot get on with it Benny boy.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            ….and one more thing, Mr blah, blah, blah…

            One of the reasons your Mr Abbas did not say yes to Ehud Olmert’s peace offer in 2008 is because it did not include the “right of return” of large numbers of decendants of Palestinian Arab refugees.

            Interesting that due to your urging, I came up with some new thinking of how to resolve that contentious issue which is one of the stumbling block to a peace deal (see my earlier post). But you have been doing your darnest to avoid discussing my suggestion. I suppose because it does not allow you to engage in your favorite past time of pointing the finger and bashing Israel, right, Benny?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            One of the reasons Abbas did not say yes to Ehud Olmert’s peace offer in 2008 is because it did not grant the “right of return” to millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees.

            It is therefore interesting to see Benny avoiding my suggestion (see a few posts back) about how that impasse could be resolved. I guess he does not like the fact that my solution does not involve Israel bashing, his favorite pass time…

            Reply to Comment
    6. Average American

      You guys arguing about peripheral things, individual politicians. You won’t the over-riding thing, won’t admit Israel was founded on, and still pursues with enthusiasm, Zionism, the concept that all of the (undefined) Land Of Israel belongs to only the Jews. What a preposterous arrogant racist concept. And why does USA support this? Some poster here said it: money. And where does this money come from? It’s fiat money printed by USA’s central bank the Federal Reserve Bank, dominated by Jews and Jewish views of punishment and reward.

      Reply to Comment
      • Ben

        Average American, why do you always descend into nutty anti-Semitic conspiracy theories? Here is a rational, calm, non-paranoid version of what your overheated mind is spinning out;:

        Gideon Levy’s account of a recent conference in Washington, “a completely unusual event…taking place at the National Press Club….”The Israel Lobby: Is It Good for the U.S.? Is It Good for Israel?”:

        “The student leaders, who are now on the frontline, spoke of the all-out war to silence them being waged by Jewish organizations on campus. It is presumably the rearguard action of Hillel International and its ilk: The destructiveness of the Zionist propaganda machine here will one day be exposed as a fatal error. It spurs more opposition than support.

        The ex-politicians also related how difficult it was to voice criticism of Israel. Paul Findley, 93, a Republican U.S. Representative from Illinois (from 1961-1983), mentioned a senior diplomat friend of his who knew it was impossible to criticize Israel to the secretary of state through the usual channels, only in one-on-one conversations. There are hundreds of people in the Administration whose salaries are paid by the U.S. taxpayer and who believe their sole mission is to defend Israel, even by destroying freedom of expression, Findley added. His voice shook when he said the conference was a rare opportunity to express such ideas. He spoke of the paralyzing fear of criticizing Israel, lest one be labeled an anti-Semite. It’s not the politicians who run this country; it’s the lobbyists, including the Jewish lobby, Findley said. His remarks were echoed by Nick Rahall, who served as a Democratic U.S. Representative from West Virginia for 38 years and who said American democracy had been hijacked by wealthy businessmen like Sheldon Adelson.

        Paul R. Pillar, formerly a senior member of the U.S. intelligence community, explained in a brilliant lecture the advantages of the nuclear agreement with Iran, and argued that Israel’s opposition to it stemmed from the fear that, in its wake, the occupation would become the main issue.”

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          …. applause, Brian, oops I mean Benny, you tacitly support everything that our NON Average American (read Arab) says. All you are saying to him is to cool it because this is no longer how it’s done in “polite society” open Jew bashing is out. Israel bashing is in…

          And you still refuse to discuss practical, just solutions which would lead to resolution of the Palestinian Arab – Israeli conflict. That’s what gives you away!

          Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Yeah me and Gideon. You are bizarre. You are angry. You are paranoid. You are very tiresome.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Gideon? Who is he? Your special friend? Or is he your crutch?

            Relax, I know who he is. He is Gideon Levy – court Jew extraordinaire.

            Reply to Comment
    7. Click here to load previous comments