+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

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

Why are Palestinian citizens expected to be loyal to Israel?

Israelis on the Left and Right alike expect Palestinian citizens of Israel to display loyalty to the state, yet they never acknowledge Israeli crimes against Palestinians. It’s high time they took a long look in the mirror.

“Is he also going to grow up to be an enemy of Israel like you?” A. asked as he played with Adi, my one-and-a-half-year-old nephew.

“Maybe, if god and Gideon Levy will it, he and a lot more like him will grow up to be a fifth column,” I answered as I put another Winnie the Pooh plate into the shopping cart — I’m babysitting the future demographic threat today, and I must do as it wishes.

“You know bro, out of everything you write, and you know I don’t agree with you, but you know what bothers me the most? It seems to me that the moment soldiers start dying, not even your balls could give a shit, and that’s not cool.”

Surprised by the attempt of A. – a Jewish childhood friend from Lyd, who I had ran into at the supermarket – to pretend to be an authority on my testicles’ areas of interest, I decided to get away and head to the cashier, before Adi bankrupted me but mostly because I was sick of these arguments.

A Palestinian youth living in Israel waves a Palestinian flag during protest against the attack on Gaza in the city of Lod, Israel, August 3, 2014. (Oren Ziv/Activestills.org)

A Palestinian youth living in Israel waves a Palestinian flag during protest against the attack on Gaza in the city of Lyd, Israel, August 3, 2014. (Oren Ziv/Activestills.org)

The way that the majority of Israelis relate to us, Palestinian citizens of Israel, will continue in its duality forever, it seems. On one hand, most of the chosen people relate to us as Arabs – especially in order to turn us away from jobs, to come eat our hummus, and more recently, to attack us on city streets and in cyberspace. On the other hand, those same people will treat us like disloyal Israelis, at least when it comes to political arguments (the conclusions of which are generally predetermined). In our lighthearted conversation at the supermarket, A. saw me as someone who was anti-Israel, a not-nice Arab, an “enemy of Israel” (and all that despite our shared childhood memories), and he showed his disappointment that I shed no tears for the soldiers who died in Gaza.

In other words, A. doesn’t see me as an Israeli like himself (“a Palestinian enemy of Israel”) but at the same time expects me to show patriotism and loyalty according to his needs (“as soon as soldiers start dying, you should be empathetic”), or at least to show some sensitivity to the soldiers who were sent to protect the people of Israel from all of those terrorist Gazan children. A. doesn’t really try to understand me, but rather automatically makes his own assumptions and refuses — or is unable — to see their inherent flaws.

Flawed basic assumptions are one thing, but what’s even worse are postulations supposedly “based on facts” and their resulting judgements and conclusions. In a Haaretz article earlier this week, Alexander Yakobson wrote about a poll by the Israel Democracy Institute, which shows that “less than half of Arab [Israeli] citizens decisively declared that there was no justification for the [military] operation.” And, of course, what everyone was looking for: 23.7 percent of Arabs think that embarking on the Gaza operation was justified. On the basis of these numbers, Yakobson reaches the necessary conclusion that there is no place for “hatred and wholesale slander” of Arabs by Jews, and ponders whether there are Arab leaders who spoke out against “Zoabi’s harsh words.”

First of all, the credibility and trustworthiness of the opinion poll should be cast in some doubt. Let’s start with the fact that the organization that carried it out represents democracy and pluralism like MK Miri Regev represents humanism. Out of 19 members of its management, senior fellows and department heads, nearly all are Ashkenazi and only two are women. Arabs? Mizrahim? More women? Don’t make Israeli democracy laugh.

Without dissecting the past of the institute’s members (because people change and articles can only be so long), let’s take a quick look at its latest “peace index.” At the same time that McCarthyism is spreading and Arabs are being dismissed from their jobs because of personal views (Hebrew), how reliable can a survey about their opposition or support for Israel be? Can their answers really be viewed as reliable? Are the Druze and other minorities — who serve in the army and support the occupation — categorized as “Israeli Arabs” this time in order to make the sample “representative” when it’s convenient?

Israeli policemen arrest protesters as Palestinians living in Israel and left-wing activists protest against the Israeli attack on Gaza in downtown Haifa, July 18, 2014. Israeli police arrested 28 activists, as protesters took to the streets and blocked roads calling for an end to the attack. (Fiaz abu-Ramele/Activestills.org)

Israeli policemen arrest protesters as Palestinians living in Israel and left-wing activists protest against the Israeli attack on Gaza in downtown Haifa, July 18, 2014. Israeli police arrested 28 activists, as protesters took to the streets and blocked roads calling for an end to the attack. (Fiaz abu-Ramele/Activestills.org)

But the conclusion that Yakobson deduces is actually interesting: the Israeli public should cease persecuting the Palestinian public in light of its apparently hidden loyalty toward Israeli crimes. Not because it’s unacceptable, not because it’s morally bankrupt in and of itself, but because some opinion poll by a Zionist organization claims that half of the Arabs support limiting criticism of “the operation.” What a strange attempt at self-justification; what does the world want from Israel, after all, even a large part of the Arab population here supports the continued massacre of their kinfolk.

But that said, I prefer A.’s dualistic approach to the Arabs, or even Yakobson’s self-justification over the distorted way the Zionist “Left” relates to Palestinians in Israel. A few weeks ago, Haaretz journalist Ravit Hecht more or less demanded that MK Haneen Zoabi be put on trial in the court of morality for refusing to call the alleged kidnappers of three Israeli youths “terrorists.”

By just bringing the topic up for discussion we can see just how much the Zionist left doesn’t acknowledge Israeli crimes against Palestinians. Palestinian youths are regularly kidnapped from their homes by the most moral army in the world. Have Hecht and her friends ever thought of calling that “terrorism?” And what about administrative detention? The army’s acts of murder in the West Bank? I don’t even dare ask about the deaths of over 2,100 Gazans and leaving hundreds of thousands homeless? If you ask the Zionist “Left” what happened in Gaza, you’ll get tons of twisted denouncements, but no recognition of the dry facts. At a time when racism in Israel is breaking all of its own sickening personal records, it’s easier and more comfortable to denounce the not-nice Arabs than to look in the mirror.

On the basis of all that, I’d like to call for most of the Israeli public to be tried in a court of morality, all those who are Zionist, for their refusal to call the actions of the Israeli army “terrorism.” Are you done giggling? Good, now we can go back to the collective Israeli consciousness: justification, turning a blind eye and the dismissal of anyone who dares to speak out against the trickery and lies of the Zionist establishment.

It’s not hard to guess whether A. is bothered by the fact that the macho Israeli public couldn’t give a shit about Palestinian suffering.

Read this article in Hebrew on Local Call here.

Related:
Why Palestinian citizens are no longer safe
Not just escalation: A frightening new era of Jewish-Arab relations in Israel
Why does the Israeli left oppose MK Haneen Zoabi?

Newsletter banner 5 - 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
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. CigarButNoNice

      “The way that the majority of Israelis relate to us,…”

      Yeah, make it sound like it was totally unprovoked. Ignore the way you Arabs have related to the “Zionists”: as colonial invaders to be vanquished or subjugated sooner or later.

      As long as you insist on revising history so as to make yourselves the “indigenous” and the Jews “European settlers,” don’t be surprised when a growing number of the latter come to disbelieve in the prospects of future coexistence. What doesn’t work even in Europe and the United Kingdom (*cough*Rotherham*cough*) hasn’t a snowball’s chance in heck of working between Jews and Arabs in the Middle East.

      Reply to Comment
      • Blue

        Don’t forget about the suicide bombings and continual support for those with genocidal actions and ideologies towards Israel and Jews in general.

        “[In addition, over 500,000 Arabs moved to Jewish lands in Palestine] between 1932-1944 to take advantage of living conditions existing in no other Arab state…” – Robert F. Kennedy

        Reply to Comment
        • Blue:

          It’s always the same idiotic racism of course. In this particular manifestation Jews had the right to move to Palestine but non-Jews hadn’t.

          It also comes straight out of Joan Peter’s ‘From Time Immemorial’, a book no one takes seriously anymore, except for a few very dumb Americans.

          Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          Very dishonest, Blue. The real quote:

          “THE JEWS POINT OUT WITH PRIDE TO THE FACT that over 500,000 Arabs, in the 12 years between 1932-1944, came INTO PALESTINE to take advantage of living conditions existing in no other Arab state…”

          Which is quite fascinating, because the Nonjewish population between 1931 and 1945 increased only by 300.000 and Arabs reproduce, too.

          But hey, if one can bend international law, the law of mathematics and logic will pose no problems … ROFL.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “Which is quite fascinating, because the Nonjewish population between 1931 and 1945 increased only by 300.000 and Arabs reproduce, too.”

            Fine, let’s go with your numbers then, Davey.

            In the 1931 census, it was found that there were 860,000 Arabs in Palestine. By your own admission, that number increased by 300,000 in 14 years. That is an astonishing growth rate of 35%. Or about 2.5% per year.

            Please Don’t even try to pretend that such growth rates are possible without having Arab immigration too. Not just Jewish immigration.

            So how come you guys on the extreme (religious) left are only hung up about Jewish immigration to Palestine but you neglect to talk about Arab immigration at the same time?

            Is it because you consider the Arabs übermenschen? And you consider the Jews untermentchen?

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            2,16%, Gustav. The actual birthrate is about 1,99%.

            “So how come you guys on the extreme (religious) left … And you consider the Jews untermentchen?”

            It’s quite interesting that it was Übermenschen that put Jews into categories of useful and not useful.

            It’ even more interesting that what you call extreme left is considered to be left of right extremism in normal democracies. So go figure.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “2,16%, Gustav. The actual birthrate is about 1,99%.”

            I see Maths is not your strong point Davey. Do the maths:

            300,000 / 860,000 X 100 = 34.8%

            Now divide that by 14 (1945 – 1931), it comes to: 2.49% per year.

            You say the birth rate was 1.99%? Ok let’s go with that one. Now how about the death rate?

            Remember:
            Growth = Birth Rate – Death Rate + Immigration

            So 2.49% = 1.99% – Death Rate + Immigration

            So whichever way you look at it, those figures clearly show that Arab immigration contributed to the growth in the Arab population of Palestine. Even by your own figures mind you …

            “It’s quite interesting that it was Übermenschen that put Jews into categories of useful and not useful.”

            Yes, interesting. To people like you, we are untermentchen because whatever we do, we are in the wrong.

            Also, to people like you, whatever the Arabs do, they are never in the wrong because they are ubermentchen.

            “It’ even more interesting that what you call extreme left is considered to be left of right extremism in normal democracies. So go figure.”

            I am glad you did not leave out the word “EXTREMISM” which of course by definition is not normal. But you are right about the fact that extremism exists in all human societies.

            Reply to Comment
      • Palestinian

        Aren’t they colonial invaders?

        A group of immigrants from Europe with pure colonial ambitions who have been ethnically cleansing the indigenous population for decades ,what does that make them ?

        European settlers! …next

        Reply to Comment
    2. ***Ignore the way you Arabs have related to the “Zionists”: as colonial invaders to be vanquished or subjugated sooner or later.***

      Ignore also the way European Zionist settlers expelled 750,000 indigenous Arabs in 1948 and another 250,000 in 1967.

      Ignore also nearly 50 years of occupation and colonisation of the WB by said Zionist settlers and that another 2,000,000 Palestinians live in refugees in neighbouring countries outside of historic Palestine.

      Ignore all that and still feel ‘just’…

      Reply to Comment
      • CigarButNoNice

        I owe you the utmost gratitude for proving my case, Gert. This is the revisionist stance you hold, and Rami Younis holds, and a growing majority of the Western Left, and nearly the entire Arab/Muslim world; a stance under which the only thing Israeli Jews can hope for is clemency on the part of the “Palestinians” once they attain their goal of “liberation.”

        No thanks. A lot of us Israeli Jews have stopped playing that game. If you do a zero-sum game, sooner or later you’ll get a zero-sum response. The Arab imperialists and their Leftist stooges justify every aggression against Israeli Jews in the name of “resistance to the oppressor”; very well, then Israeli Jews are more than capable of showing how the Arabs are the oppressors, settlers, invaders, colonists and land-thieves and are entitled to resist them on that basis.

        Arabs are not indigenous to the Land of Israel any more than Turks are indigenous to Greece (http://shorl.com/jyrusemelopru). I for one do not expect Arab colonists to be loyal to the Jewish state; all I expect is that they accept the Land of Israel belongs exclusively to the Jews by virtue of indigenous peoples’ rights and accordingly move to any of 20+ Arab states of their choosing instead of stealing and colonizing the indigenous territory of another nation. No justice, no peace!

        Reply to Comment
        • David T

          “Arabs are not indigenous to the Land of Israel …”

          I allready explained to you that the Arab people did not move there, but that their army arabized the local people and that most them converted to Islam for different reasons.

          Btw. Abraham was not indigenous, too. Neither are Europeans.

          Reply to Comment
      • Kiwi

        Which is not different than what you and your kind do Gert.

        You ignore the 700,000 to 800,000 Jews who were expelled from Arab countries.

        You people never want to talk about that bit of history do you?

        Reply to Comment
    3. More and more, the world is recognizing that Israel is a brutal, imperial, apartheid regime, perpetrating genocide on the Palestinian people. Gert’s comments above are all accurate, and except in dwindling Zionist corners, this reality is increasingly accepted. As Israel becomes more and more isolated in the world community, the Palestinians will gain their freedom from their cruel oppressors.

      Reply to Comment
      • Whiplash

        Wishful thinking on Robert’s behalf

        “As Israel becomes more and more isolated in the world community the Palestinians will gain their freedom.”

        Israel was much more isolated in the world community in the 1950s, 60s, 70s and 80s than it is now. Despite this isolation, Israel managed to grow as a Nation state. The Palestinian Arabs went from one catastrophe to the next denying freedoms to their own people.

        One will remember, if you are old enough, that after the 1973 war, the Arab states used oil as a weapon causing many states with friendly relations with Israel to cut off diplomatic ties. The UN equated Zionism with racism. The Vatican and China did not even recognize Israel. The Soviet Union fomented two wars against Israel in 1967 and 1973.

        Yet Palestinians did not get their freedom. They were content to live under repressive Arab regimes until the 1967 war. Then in 1968 the PLO amended their Charter to claim that Palestinians should have a state from the River to the Sea, while eliminating Israel and its people, except for those who lived under Ottoman rule.

        In 1978 Palestinians were offered autonomy and a future state but instead decided to wage war and terrorism as they have done ever since, without bringing themselves closer to the freedoms which they say they seek.

        Meanwhile Israel has become an economic and military power which is sought out by the nations of he world as a partner in trade and commerce. Just this week Israel signed a $15 billion deal with Jordan to supply it with Israeli gas for the next 15 years. Recently Israel signed an unique research and development agreement with Japan. Israel was admitted into an elite research and development group in Israel. Israel has signed a new trade deal with India. Israel has a special research and development agreement with the state of California. European firms seek out partnerships with Israeli tech and medical companies.

        In addition, the United States’ people and Congress have never been stronger in their support for Israel.

        So not too many people will worry about doom and gloom predictions of Israeli isolation having any real effect on Israeli positions vis a vis the Palestinians.

        If Palestinians want peace, they need to disarm, stop incitement and hatred, forget about a right of return and accept the Jewish state of Israel.

        Reply to Comment
        • Whiplash:

          Israel hasn’t been ‘isolated’ during the 70s and 80s. Both the US and the rest of the West have supported it almost unconditionally from roughly 1967 to today. Many Arab states have treaties with Israel or are resigned to its existence.

          But grassroots support for Israel is severely waning in both the US and Europe. For now overall support still remains strong but that will change, as long as Israel continues to do what it does. European and US Zionist support groups feel beleaguered and unsure how to react to Israel’s continuing, increasing even, obstinacy.

          These decades of unconditional support have made Israel extremely arrogant and convinced that it can keep going like this forever. That, history will show you, is not going to be the case.

          Disarmament of the Palestinians will not make Israel change course: that’s because the Zionist plan was and still is today something akin to Cigarbut’s vision; maximum territory and minimum demography [Palestinians]. Israel doesn’t oppress and dispossess Palestinians because they are armed (they are MOSTLY not anyway) or because they resist: it does it because Greater Israel, as Jewish as possible, is the goal.

          The current situation could possibly have been avoided if the Israeli ‘Left’ had provided a sufficient counter weight to settlerism but it didn’t do that/succeed at it.

          Reply to Comment
          • Whiplash

            France imposed an arms embargo on Israel in 1967. Many European countries in the 1973 war refused landing rights in their country to Israel and American planes seeking to bring in replacement war supplies. Austria closed its borders to Jewish refugees from the Soviet Union who were coming to Israel. European capitals allowed Palestinian terrorists to operate against Israel. Jewish diplomats were subject to assassination attempts. Europeans either voted for racist UN general assembly declarations or abstained from them.

            Meanwhile Israel had no diplomatic relationships with states of the Soviet Block except for Romania. In Africa only Malawi, Lesotho and Swaziland maintained full diplomatic relations with Israel.
            Israel did not have diplomatic relations with India, China or the Vatican, which represented two-thirds of humanity.

            Things radically began to change after the fall of the Soviet Block in the 1980s. By 1991 the UN rescinded its racist resolution on Zionism. The Vatican, India and China all granted full diplomatic status with Israel. Every former member of the Soviet Block has diplomatic relations with Israel. African countries re-established their ties with Israel.

            As of 2012 Israel had diplomatic relationships with 156 states. this is a change from when the majority of the countries of the world shunned Israel in the 1970s.

            As of the present, Israel enjoys unconditional support from the majority of Americans. Jewish culture is interwoven with American and Western culture to such an extant extant Israel will continue to receive strong support from the West.

            Reply to Comment
          • Eliza

            Hmm… Jewish culture is interwoven with American and western culture to such an extent that Israel will continue to receive strong support from the West…

            Jewish culture may well be interwoven with American/Western culture but Israeli culture certainly is not. Why do you always conflate things Jewish with things Israeli?

            And keep in mind that American/Western culture is enriched by other cultures; whether they be Asian, Latino, and amongst others, wait for it, Arabic.

            The more we learn about Israel and its wanton warring ways, the more support we have for the Palestinians.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “Why do you always conflate things Jewish with things Israeli?”

            Duh, because 80% of Israelis are Jewish and most non Israeli Jews support Israel. Can’t you accept that simple fact?

            “The more we learn about Israel and its wanton warring ways, the more support we have for the Palestinians.”

            Who is the “WE” you are talking about Eliza? Are you using the royal plural?

            Oh and nasty old Israel and it’s warring ways. But the Arabs are just peaceful people who are not war like, right?

            Hey Eliza, which KGB school did you go to? Your propaganda is showing.

            Reply to Comment
          • Laurent Weppe

            Duh, because 80% of Israelis are Jewish

            Out of the app. 12,5 million people living in Israel, either as citizens or subject of the local régime du sabre, only 4,9 million (less than 40%) are actually jewish. The israeli state tries to hide it by rigging the numbers (identifying as jewish the 1,2 million atheists with a jewish grandmother while omitting the West Bank & Gaza denizens in the official states), but in the end all of this is little more than state-sanctioned fiction meant first and foremost to artificially preserve the consensus gentium used to justify the existing social hierarchy.
            And quite frankly, a social order that treats the preservation of a logical fallacy as a such vital element that it will spend large times and resources lying just to maintain it is neither sustainable nor worth fighting for it.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “Out of the app. 12,5 million people living in Israel”

            Really? Try 8 million.

            As for the rest of your post, it is as ignorant as the one above so I won’t even bother to waste my time with it.

            Reply to Comment
          • Laurent Weppe

            Really? Try 8 million

            What did I wrote? Oh yes:
            The israeli state tries to hide it by rigging the numbers […] omitting the West Bank & Gaza denizens in the official stats
            Could someone grant Gus a cookie? I think he expects to be rewarded for this fine public display of shameless mendaciousness.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            ” numbers […] omitting the West Bank & Gaza denizens in the official stats”

            Gawd you are ignorant Laurent!

            The Arabs of the West Bank never were and never will be Israeli citizens. They were meant to become citizens of the shining new Palestinian Arab state which the Arabs chose not to create in 1947 after the UN partition plan.

            Tell me Laurent, both Germany and Japan were occupied by the allies after WW2. So did you count the German and Japanese population as part of the populations of the allied countries?

            No of course you didn’t. So why is Palestine different? Because you are dishonest?

            Reply to Comment
          • Laurent Weppe

            The Arabs of the West Bank never were and never will be Israeli citizens.

            The Afrikaner sybarites said very similar things about their Bantustans’ subjects.

            Until it became clear that their exit strategy (keep partying until the very last minute, leave with as much looted wealth as possible for Europe and North America once the unsustainable corrupt state reaches the limits of its capacity to violently keep the underclass obedient) was not going to work as smoothly as they thought because the western hemisphere’s public opinions were holding them in contempt.

            Same thing will happen in Israel: eventually, enough powerful nations will force the local bourgeoisie and its lackeys to stop repeating their tiresome, shallow sophistry and your prose will come to be universally regarded as the late 20th-early 21th century’s equivalent of a court jester’s insincere laudations

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            My sophistry, Laurent? I think you meant your sophistry. Remember your attempt to inflate, Israel’s population for your own purpose? Now that is sophistry.

            Now, read my lips:

            Have you heard of the two state solution? That will be the outcome once your Airabs give up their zero sum game.

            After that, there will be one Jewish state with an Arab minority (as is the case now). And there will be an ethnically pure Arab Muslim state. Which is what they desire.

            Get it, Laurent baby? Africa and the Africaners have nothing to do with it.

            However, if the Arabs dilly dally too long and they won’t give up their silly zero sum game and your powerful countries try to force us to commit suicide, things will happen that you better hope that they shouldn’t happen. Kapish?

            Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          “In 1978 Palestinians were offered autonomy and a future state but instead decided to wage war and terrorism as they have done ever since, …”

          Since when did Jews wage war and terrorism to acquire a state? 1939? And for how long are they occupying beyond the borders in which they declared statehood? That is war and terrorism against a whole people.

          Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        “As Israel becomes more and more isolated in the world community,”

        Poppycock, Robbie. There has been a change of government in India. The new Indian Government is Israel friendly. And it won’t end there. Just wait till our off shore gas fields come on line.

        And that’s not all either. Just wait and see how people’s eyes will open about what Arabs are like as they observe how they fight wars in Syria and Iraq and how they treat minorities such as Christians and Yazidis. Do you think Arabs will endear themselves to anyone normal who is not a religious extreme leftie? Yes, dxtreme leftism is a religious cult.

        Reply to Comment
    4. Thanks Robert.

      Cigarbut shows himself on numerous occasions to be radically opposed to multiculturalism (hence also the silly reference to Rotherham).

      His blathering about who’s indigenous and who is not is therefore just a feeble ‘justification’ for his racism. Like many Israelis the thought that some non-Jews also live in Israel abhors him. It’s what we’ve come to expect from the Far Right, Zionist or otherwise.

      Reply to Comment
    5. Whiplash

      What a radical concept that citizens of a state should be loyal to the state. Is not treason a crime in every nation?

      Do not many countries have oaths of allegiance? In Canada every new citizen takes an oath of allegiance to Queen and Country.

      This is a simple expectation in any country. However, some Israeli Arabs feel allegiance to the Palestinian people of Gaza and the West Bank to exclusion to the citizens of Israel.

      If these Arabs (or extreme left wing or extreme right wing Jews) feel such an antipathy to the state they live in, maybe they should sell what they own and move someplace else where people think the way they do.

      Alternatively they could join the political process in Israel, joining existing parties in Israel other than Arab parties which are more interested in advancing the claims Israel’s neighbors instead of improving the conditions of Israel-Arab communities. One would think that Arabs would achieve a lot more for their communities by joining Israeli left wing or centrist parties where they can get others to advance programs and projects for Arab areas.

      Reply to Comment
      • “What a radical concept that citizens of a state should be loyal to the state. Is not treason a crime in every nation?

        Do not many countries have oaths of allegiance? In Canada every new citizen takes an oath of allegiance to Queen and Country.”

        As well naturalized citizens take an oath of allegiance:

        “…I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law…”

        No oath, however, can be required of a natural born citizen of the US because of the 14th Amendment, which simply asserts citizenship. If one tried, the courts would strike the oath down, whether or not it was restricted to a sub class. Once one becomes a naturalized US citizen, there is no difference between oneself and a natural born citizen; attempts to distinguish on that basis have been stricken by the courts.

        Treason is not a thought crime but material support for the breaking of law intended to facilitate the overthrow of the US government. The naturalization oath quoted above does not make opposition to US policy a crime, let alone treason; indeed, as the Civil Rights movement has shown, the breaking of law need not be opposition to the concept of law; all depends on willingness to accept punishment without evasion, on directly nonviolent infractions, such as sit ins, assembly without permit, and, at one time, just sitting at a lunch counter.

        I did not stand united into Iraq; I was not treasonous. The fate of that area suggests my position was not without merit. Jettison the adolescent attitude towards race and loyalty. The world is more subtle than your cookie cutter categories.

        Reply to Comment
        • Whiplash

          Greg, did you publicly support Al-Qaeda in killing three thousand Americans and hope that Al-Qaeda would kill more Americans as Palestinian Israelis said to Jewish Israelis? Did you try this in down town Manhattan?

          Did you participate in Al-Qaeda victory rallies and march for their right to kill more Americans as Palestinian Israelis did? Strange that I cannot recall such rallies or prominent American legislators attending and lending their support towards the enemy.

          Did you advocate a holocaust of all Americans as one Palestinian Israeli did to Jewish Israelis?

          Did you riot and cause injuries to American policemen while advocating for the right of your enemies to kill fellow Americans as Palestinian Arabs did?

          Did you travel to a foreign country to meet a Hezbollah spy who was responsible for the deaths of Americans as three Palestinian Arab MKs did?

          If my memory serves me correct the American state with the support of the American public undertook the arrest, jailing and interrogation of many residents of the United States whose loyalty was suspect or last name was similar to Muslims or Arab suspects of terrorism against America.

          Reply to Comment
          • “Public support,” if speech, is not material support, so protected under the 1st Amendment. Your “hope that Al-Qaeda would kill more Americans as Palestinian Israelis said to Jewish Israelis” is a gross generalization of categories, rather hysterical.

            Attending rallies, if duly called as any other rally, without violence or coercion, is protected as well by the 1st Amendment. What legislators are inclined to attend or not is immaterial.

            “Did you advocate a holocaust of all Americans as one Palestinian Israeli did to Jewish Israelis”: again, advocacy is protected under the 1st Amendment if not including material support toward violence. Here’s the distinction: if I said that in principle town hall should be blown up I cannot be touched; if I say the same but add that one may find explosives at such and such place, this becomes material support toward crime and can be interdicted under US law. What is rather amazing in this example of yours is how you pick a single Palestinian Israeli and try to generate categorical loathing hysteria towards more. The whole point of the rule of law is to prevent such generalization, which might lead to as much harm as the ungeneralized act.

            Rioting and injuring are neither speech nor assembly and not protected by the 1st Amendment. They can and should be interdicted with force and arrest.

            Travelling to foreign countries is different. The US unto this day disallows travel on US passports to Cuba. In fact, because the Constitution does not have an overt equal protection clause for the Federal Government, the State can and has selectively prevented travel to some countries. In 1952 the Nobel laureate Linus Pauling applied for the renewal of his passport to attend a British Royal Society meeting. His renewal was denied, the State Department saying “the Department is of the opinion that your proposed travel would not be in the best interests of the United States” due to his left politics, that being the McCarthy Era. If one has a passport today, it is possible to deny port exit for “security reasons,” but the US tendency toward equal protection in Federal law limits its use. If I were going to meet someone with no criminal material intent, denial should not occur; but I suspect these days it does occur under most radars.

            The State did indeed, after 9-11, detain rather broadly for here. Attorneys and the courts not long thereafter began to act. Detaining solely because of a “Muslim” or “Arabic” name would not stand long, and did not. That is, the courts acted to curtail the, er, enthusiasm of the security apparatus.

            Let’s return to my first reply. I noted how citizenship may not be stripped for treason in the US, and how loyalty oaths restricted to a class of individuals by ethnicity or race would fall by equal protection. I note here as well that it would also fall by application of the Israeli Declaration of Independence. As I said in that reply, “Treason is not a thought crime but material support for the breaking of law intended to facilitate the overthrow of the US government.” You responded by a barrage of I suppose examples which conflate speech and material support, exactly what I was distinguishing, as US law distinguishes.

            Corporate nationalism regularly tries to negate law by appealing to ethnic/racial protection from some other ethnic/racial group; it asserts racial identity and solidarity as trump over the rule of law. The internal battle in Israel is there, not between Jews and Palestinians, but between those who would nullify law by ethnicity/race and those who would not.

            You conflate speech and assembly with material support in such a way as to generate fear and hysteria, the closing of minds, thereby shutting down the rule of law. It is really rather sad, and I must close as I did last time:

            Jettison the adolescent attitude towards race and loyalty. The world is more subtle than your cookie cutter categories.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            “Jettison the adolescent attitude towards race and loyalty. The world is more subtle than your cookie cutter categories.”

            Why should they Greg? Why are you preaching to the Jews to do what the rest of the world is not doing, including most people in your country?

            Just because the cookie left wants to create a new world government, it does not mean that the rest of the world adopted your wacky theories.

            Go fix the world first. Then come and preach to Israel.

            Reply to Comment
    6. ***What a radical concept that citizens of a state should be loyal to the state. Is not treason a crime in every nation?

      Do not many countries have oaths of allegiance? In Canada every new citizen takes an oath of allegiance to Queen and Country.***

      There is a huge difference between demanding loyalty and prohibiting treason.

      Loyalty oath are basically useless: how ‘loyal’ does a citizen have to be? How do you measure that? Would dissent with some of the State’s policies qualify as ‘disloyalty’? All this is the road to Totalitarianism.

      As regards Canada demanding loyalty oaths of ‘new’ citizens, that’s pure discrimination. Of a citizen, ‘old’ or ‘new’ can be expected he obeys the state’s laws. If not, he/she is punishable under the law like anyone else.

      Simples…

      Reply to Comment
    7. Richard

      At heart, the author’s identification with Palestinians in the WB and Gaza relies on adherence to a national ideology that is worse, from a liberal and humanist perspective, than Zionism. If you take that away, he’s just a guy living in a state that kills people to defend the lives and livelihoods of people who hold passports of that state – pretty much the situation of everyone in the developed world. Israeli hypocrisy cannot exist without the author being a hypocrite as well, unless he’s also taking a position against the international system of nation-states. If that’s the case, let him tear up his passport and move to a third world country that doesn’t fight wars.

      Reply to Comment
    8. bor

      Isn’t Rami Younis the writer who told Jewish leftists that they need to shut up and defer to their Palestinian superiors?

      Yup.

      His underlings are letting him continue to publish here. I wonder if he yelled or insulted them first?

      Reply to Comment
    9. Laurent Weppe

      Why are Palestinian citizens expected to be loyal to Israel?

      Because patricians are terrified by their own plebs and keep demanding time & again signs of submissiveness which they call “display of loyalty” because it sounds better.

      Reply to Comment
    10. JohnW

      “Because patricians are terrified by their own plebs”

      Gee thanks for that stupid explanation. Here is an alternate one.

      The great western democracies incarcerated hundreds of thousands of their own citizens who were migrants from the axis countries during WW2.

      By that standard, Israel is a model of what democracies should be like during times of war. Despite having been at war with it’s Arab neighbors, Israel treats it’s Arab citizens much better than the great democracies treated their immigrant citizens during their war with their neighbors.

      Reply to Comment
      • Ray

        It boggles my mind why Israelis insist on learning and setting moral standards by the worst moments in Western history. In no court in the world, would pointing out that someone else has “done worse” mitigate your prospective punishment or verdict.

        Reply to Comment
        • Kolumn8

          We insist on learning what the West does when it faces security challenges rather than what the West says states should do in such situations.

          This is not about whether someone else has ‘done worse’ but about the actual behavior of others in similar circumstances and judging Israel’s actions accordingly rather than according to some bullshit ideal that is hypocritically promoted by the West.

          Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “We insist on learning what the West does when it faces security challenges rather than what the West says states should do in such situations.”

            Spot on. Very well put K8.

            To be fair to Ray though, based on his posts, I suspect that he is also against how the Western Powers behave. But that does not make him right.

            People like him would like people to behave not as people but as higher beings. And yes, if everyone would heed him, this world would be a much better place. Unfortunately though, what tends to happen is if the western powers or Israel ignore their own self interests (security needs) there will always be some on the other side who take advantage and cause a lot of damage to the west/Israel. It does not have to be everyone. Even a small number of people can cause a lot of damage to the security of a people.

            So, normal people say, “why take a chance, err on the side of caution”. That’s humanity for you. Do you hear me Ray?

            Reply to Comment
          • Ray

            Who exactly has “damaged” the West because of its’ magnanimity or respect for others’ rights? We’ve never behaved that way to others, especially in the developing world. We go about our business of manipulating, controlling and cheating others, as we have been since God knows when, and when something like 9/11 happens, we mourn (rightly), but refuse to consider the consequences of our treatment of others.

            The cruelest irony of the Cold War can be summed up with regards to the East Timorese struggle for independence from Suharto, a tyrant who we supported when he came to power by murdering anywhere between half a million to three million of his countrymen and fostering the corruption that pervades Indonesian politics; while we tacitly supported his repression of the Timorese independence movement, its’ few supporters included China and Gaddafi’s Libya. What is the point in fighting for “democracy,” if it involves subjugating others and denying them their rights? If a “democracy” ceases to be a democracy, what is there left to recommend it, if it denies the peoples’ will and their rights whenever it sees fit? Why does it still deserve to exist, if it has no principles or moral compass?

            It has been demonstrated, pretty clearly, with the negative reactions of millions to ruthless behavior by their governments, and those of other governments (like Israel), that humans are, at heart, social, and not anti-social as you believe. Your reassuring explanation of the world’s negative reception to bombings in Gaza being linked to anti-semitism is demonstrably false, as can be seen when the same people protest their own governments for doing the same thing. We don’t need to be told how things are in “reality,” we already know, and we’re sick of it. We’re sorry you hate us for not embracing it as you’ve chosen to.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ray

            Once again, it’s not hypocritical if we condemn the West for doing as well. Your “security” should not come before somebody else’s rights.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kolumn8

            It is hypocritical when you condemn in peacetime in other states at conflict that which you do repetitively yourself in conflict. Do as we say, not as we do is the epitomy of hipocrisy.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ray

            Who is “we?” I’m not condemning Israel for anything I wouldn’t condemn my own country for doing as well.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Who is “we?” I’m not condemning Israel for anything I wouldn’t condemn my own country for doing as well.”

            But you are condemning Israel for responding to Arab behavior which you don’t condemn.

            Hamas and their cronies murdered and injured nearly 10,000 Israelis between 2000 and 2006. Do you expect us to kiss their feet for that? And where is your condemnation of their murder of OUR civilians?

            Reply to Comment
          • Ray

            I don’t condemn people fighting for their freedom or rights, even if I wouldn’t condone the methods they use. My qualms don’t prevent me from picking sides in conflicts.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “I don’t condemn people fighting for their freedom or rights,”

            So you do believe that wars are a solution for some things. And that sometimes there are no good alternatives to war right Ray?

            Yet you refused point blank to tell me how you would avoid civilian casualties in wars that you approve of.

            How about wars to prevent massacres of innocents? Do you approve of those wars Ray? For example to avoid what happened in Rwanda, Yugoslavia and now with ISIS? Do you approve of those wars?

            Or wars of self defense? Do you approve of those wars?

            “even if I wouldn’t condone the methods they use.”

            Name one time when you condemned the methods of Hamas or Islamic Jihad, since you have been here. Give me a link to such a post.

            “My qualms don’t prevent me from picking sides in conflicts.”

            And once you pick a side, you back them to the hilt, no matter what your side does. And equally, the other side, Israel does nothing right in your eyes. It is a bit like a religious dogma for you, isn’t Ray?

            That’s another reason why I said that you exhibit double standards.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ray

            Come back when you’ve learned the difference between a war and a revolution or an insurgency. Israel is not dealing with a war, it’s dealing with one of the latter.

            Do I think VIOLENCE is necessary sometimes? Yes.

            Yugoslavia was a ploy by NATO to finalize the breakup of Yugoslavia. They ignored ethnic cleansing of serbs carried out by the Croats. Most leftists opposed that, but didn’t necessarily support Milosevic.

            Rwanda basically is now like Iraq. Paul Kagame is every bit the sectarian dictator Maliki was.

            These interventions of ours tend to really be effed up in the endgame. So no, I dont support them. What I support, in such scenarios, is material (arms, supplies, logistics) and moral (i.e. diplomatic, no-fly zones, economic sanctions of the enemy) support for the people who are under attack or oppressed. No airstrikes, no drones, no boots on the ground (unless requested explicitly). The key is not to “save lives” as it is to minimize harm done by your own side.

            The conclusion you are trying to force me to come to is BS because Israel’s situation is nowhere near as pressing as the aforementioned. Logically, jyst because violence is SOMETIMES necessary, doesnt automatically make it the case for Israel.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “Come back when you’ve learned the difference between a war and a revolution or an insurgency. Israel is not dealing with a war, it’s dealing with one of the latter.”

            Really? When exactly did Israel win the war which the Arabs have been waging against us since at least 1947? Yes, we won many battles but when did we win THE war?

            “Do I think VIOLENCE is necessary sometimes? Yes.”

            When? When it is waged against us? But we are not allowed to respond?

            “Yugoslavia was a ploy by NATO to finalize the breakup of Yugoslavia. They ignored ethnic cleansing of serbs carried out by the Croats. Most leftists opposed that, but didn’t necessarily support Milosevic.”

            So you were happy to stand by and watch the ethnic cleansing and massacres which both sides perpetrated?

            “Rwanda basically is now like Iraq. Paul Kagame is every bit the sectarian dictator Maliki was.”

            And you were happy to stand by and watch the massacre of 1 million Tutsis by Hutus although the West could have clearly prevented it?

            “These interventions of ours tend to really be effed up in the endgame.”

            Depends on your definition of “effed up”. My definition is if more innocents die because of the intervention than the numbers who die/died without intervention, then it IS an f-up. Otherwise not so much. Not to mention the deterrence effect if the a-holes who perpetrate massacres would know what would happen to them if they try. Unfortunately that last bit tends not to work because cynical politics trumps all in the west. Typically, the lefties when they come to power undo what the conservatives accomplish and it all starts again because the Jihadis are secure in the knowledge that the West is fickle and it has no staying power. A consistent bipartisan policy by both the left and right side of politics on these issues would ensure a different outcome than the outcomes that we are used to see which as you say is effed up outcomes.

            “So no, I dont support them. What I support, in such scenarios, is material (arms, supplies, logistics) and moral (i.e. diplomatic, no-fly zones, economic sanctions of the enemy) support for the people who are under attack or oppressed. No airstrikes, no drones, no boots on the ground (unless requested explicitly). The key is not to “save lives” as it is to minimize harm done by your own side.”

            BS Ray. You don’t support that. If you WOULD support it, then you would support us because we don’t need the boots of other armies on the ground to save us from being massacred. We defend ourselves. Yet you constantly berate us for doing so. It is almost as if you resent us for being able to look after ourselves. And believe me that we are. We have showed that to the world even when we faced weapons embargoes from various suppliers who were worried by the threat of Arab oil embargo. That’s not to say that we are totally self reliant of course.

            “The conclusion you are trying to force me to come to is BS because Israel’s situation is nowhere near as pressing as the aforementioned. Logically, jyst because violence is SOMETIMES necessary, doesnt automatically make it the case for Israel.”

            You would not say that if YOU and YOUR loved ones would be the ones who would be under constant danger from Palestinian Arab Jihadis. You would be screaming at your government to do something about it by using your much maligned (by you) military to protect you.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “Come back when you’ve learned the difference between a war and a revolution or an insurgency. Israel is not dealing with a war, it’s dealing with one of the latter.”

            Really? When exactly did Israel win the war which the Arabs have been waging against us since at least 1947? Yes, we won many battles but when did we win THE war? When were we at peace with ALL our neighbors? What was the longest time between two major battles which we had to fight with Arabs? When did Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran say that they are willing to accept the existence of a Jewish state in this region?

            “Do I think VIOLENCE is necessary sometimes? Yes.”

            When? When it is waged against us? But we are not allowed to respond?

            “Yugoslavia was a ploy by NATO to finalize the breakup of Yugoslavia. They ignored ethnic cleansing of serbs carried out by the Croats. Most leftists opposed that, but didn’t necessarily support Milosevic.”

            So you would have been happy to stand by and watch the ethnic cleansing and massacres which both sides perpetrated?

            “Rwanda basically is now like Iraq. Paul Kagame is every bit the sectarian dictator Maliki was.”

            And you were happy to stand by and watch the massacre of 1 million Tutsis by Hutus although the West could have clearly prevented it?

            “These interventions of ours tend to really be effed up in the endgame.”

            Depends on your definition of “effed up”. My definition is if more innocents die because of the intervention than the numbers who die or would have died without intervention, then it IS an f-up. Otherwise not so much. Not to mention the deterrence effect if the a-holes who perpetrate massacres would know what would happen to them if they try. Unfortunately that last bit tends not to work because cynical politics trumps all in the west. Typically, the lefties when they come to power undo what the conservatives accomplish and it all starts again because the Jihadis are secure in the knowledge that the West is fickle and it has no staying power. A consistent bipartisan policy by both the left and right side of politics on these issues would ensure a different outcome than the outcomes that we are used to see which as you say is effed up outcomes.

            “So no, I dont support them. What I support, in such scenarios, is material (arms, supplies, logistics) and moral (i.e. diplomatic, no-fly zones, economic sanctions of the enemy) support for the people who are under attack or oppressed. No airstrikes, no drones, no boots on the ground (unless requested explicitly). The key is not to “save lives” as it is to minimize harm done by your own side.”

            BS Ray. You don’t support that. If you WOULD support it, then you would support us because we don’t need the boots of other armies on the ground to save us from being massacred. We defend ourselves. Yet you constantly berate us for doing so. It is almost as if you resent us for being able to look after ourselves. And believe me that we are. We have showed that to the world even when we faced weapons embargoes from various suppliers who were worried by the threat of Arab oil embargo. That’s not to say that we are totally self reliant of course.

            “The conclusion you are trying to force me to come to is BS because Israel’s situation is nowhere near as pressing as the aforementioned. Logically, jyst because violence is SOMETIMES necessary, doesnt automatically make it the case for Israel.”

            You would not say that if YOU and YOUR loved ones would be the ones who would be under constant danger from Palestinian Arab Jihadis. You would be screaming at your government to do something about it by using your much maligned (by you) military to protect you.

            Reply to Comment
        • Laurent Weppe

          It boggles my mind why Israelis insist on learning and setting moral standards by the worst moments in Western history

          I call it the “I beat my wife but my neighbor rape his kids so shut the fuck up and let me punch in peace” defense.
          (It’s a longish name, I know, but I daresay the image conveys quite well the sordidness of these arguments)

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “I call it the “I beat my wife but my neighbor rape his kids so shut the fuck up and let me punch in peace” defense.”

            And I call what you call it, SLANDER.

            A bit like every time I bump into you, Laurent, I ask you in a loud voice, so that everyone can hear it …

            “WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO STOP BEATING YOUR WIFE, LAURENT?”

            After a while, everyone will start to believe that you are a wife beater.

            That’s what you guys do when you post your clownish posts in magazines like these.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ray

            I’m confused. You and your friends here are always saying “you know what, we don’t care what all those anti-semites that are the rest of the civilized world thinks, we do what we want,” yet you’re so invested in both convincing us of the justness of your cause, and “protecting” your good name.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “I’m confused. You and your friends here are always saying “you know what, we don’t care what all those anti-semites that are the rest of the civilized world thinks, we do what we want,” yet you’re so invested in both convincing us of the justness of your cause, and “protecting” your good name.”

            No, we are not here to convince you. We cannot change religious beliefs. Like I said before, you guys are akin to a religious cult.

            The reason why we are here is to counterbalance your stories and spins against us. We want to make sure that if someone who is not of your faith comes to read articles and posts here, then they should get the opportunity to read not just what you guys say but they should hear what we have to say too.

            The rest of course is up to them. Neither you nor us can force anyone to believe what we want them to believe. But if they only get to hear what you are saying then they are more likely to fall under your spell.

            Reply to Comment
          • Laurent Weppe

            I’m confused.

            It’s not that confusing:

            You and your friends here are always saying “you know what, we don’t care what all those anti-semites that are the rest of the civilized world thinks, we do what we want,”
            That is called grandstanding

            yet you’re so invested in both convincing us of the justness of your cause, and “protecting” your good name.
            This is the existential dread that the aforementioned grandstanding is meant to hide.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Another religious leftie who willfully ignores our response to the stupid question which his fellow cultist asked.

            It’s like talking to a wall.

            Reply to Comment
      • David T

        “By that standard, Israel is a model of what democracies should be like during times of war.”

        Yes, tell this to all of the refugees and their descendents which this democracy expelled and denationalized because of their faith to become a “Jewish democracy”. By that standard other democracies who expelled others to implement their racist version of a state should be models, too, right?

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          By that standard the following countries are racists:

          Arab countries:
          Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, Lybia, Lebanon and Jordan for expelling their Jews.

          European countries:
          Russia, Germany, Turkey, Greece, Poland. For expelling various ethnicities including ethnic Germans, Crimean Tartars, Jews, Gypsies, Greeks, Turks and Armenians around the early 1900s as well as during and after WW2.

          Asia: Pakistan and India for expelling Hindus and Muslims respectively.

          I am sure there are more which I could have listed but I got sick of looking it up.

          Even if your claim would be true that we expelled 100% of the Palestinian Arabs from Palestine, which is self evidently absurd, because quite a large number of them just fled a war zone as it happens in all wars. And some of them remained and became Israeli citizens but even if you deny that, even then Israel has plenty of company as the above list shows.

          But Davey boy, according to the likes of you, when Jews do something supposedly bad which many others do routinely, if Jews do it, then it is always 1000% worse than the same or worse things which others do. But you are not a racist and a hater, are you Davey Boy? Yea, Not much.

          Reply to Comment
    11. Pedro X

      A little note for Palestinian. It is the Palestinians who were part of the Arab colonial, imperialistic, conquering, enslaving, racist people who took over Israel, Syria, Iraq and the whole Maghreb. The Jews are the indigenous people to the area. In addition over 50% of the Israeli population was born in the middle east before the 1948 war.

      Reply to Comment
      • David T.

        “The Jews are the indigenous people to the area.”

        ROFL. So somehow not only the Jews and their descendantes who actually lived in Palestine before 1880 were indigineous, but also every other Jew who lived in the rest of the world for thousands of years and moved to Palestine. And the Nonjewish Palestinians who actually lived their for more than thousands of years are not indigineous, because they were arabized during the Arab conquest.

        What about Christians? Areall of them the “the indigineous people of the area”, too? LOL.

        “In addition over 50% of the Israeli population was born in the middle east before the 1948 war.”

        Actually 50% of the Jews in Palestine in 1948 had not even become citizens of Palestine and had not even acquired political/national rights to decide its future.

        Reply to Comment
    12. ****Please Don’t even try to pretend that such growth rates are possible without having Arab immigration too. Not just Jewish immigration.

      So how come you guys on the extreme (religious) left are only hung up about Jewish immigration to Palestine but you neglect to talk about Arab immigration at the same time?****

      The people who are hung up on Arab immigration to Palestine are the Zionists, Gustav.

      Massive Jewish immigration with the purpose of establishing a state is fine by them. Arabs? Not so much…

      Still today Arabs expelled in 948 and 1967 haven’t been allowed to return.

      Colonisation by Jewish settlers in WB and E.J’sem runs into hundreds of thousands by now.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        “Massive Jewish immigration with the purpose of establishing a state is fine by them. Arabs? Not so much…”

        There you go again Gertie.

        Both Arabs and Jews lived in Palestine. Both Arabs and Jews immigrated to Palestine but according to you and your Arabs, Jews had no right to live in Palestine, nor to immigrate to Palestine. Even though Palestine was not an Arab owned country, only Arabs had the right to live here, to immigrate here and to form an Arab state? Not much …

        “Still today Arabs expelled in 948 and 1967 haven’t been allowed to return.”

        Arabs fled in a war of aggression which they started. So their descendants could return to the shiny Palestinian state in West Bank and Gaza if only they would pledge to mend their bad old ways and promise not to start new wars of aggression against us.

        “Colonisation by Jewish settlers in WB and E.J’sem runs into hundreds of thousands by now.”

        Colonization? How can one colonize one’s own land? Did you know that Jerusalem is an old Jewish city which the Arabs colonized? In fact, until 634 AD, Arabic was never a language spoken anywhere in this region or North Africa. But now it is the lingua franca. How come, Gertie? I’ll tell you how come. The Arabs are a colonizing people. And all we have been trying to do is to appease them by letting them stay and form their 23rd Arab Muslim state in lands which used to belong to us before the Arabs were even heard of. If they keep this up though, nasty things are bound to happen. Tell your friends not to push their luck Gertie.

        Reply to Comment
      • Kiwi

        “Still today Arabs expelled in 948 and 1967 haven’t been allowed to return.”

        They won’t be allowed to return Gert. Why should they? So that they would be able to finish the job which their fathers tried to do unsuccessfully?

        Again, you are ignoring the 800,000 Jews who were expelled from Arab lands.

        Most of those, Jews ended up in Israel while most of the Palestinian refugees ended up in Arab countries.

        There you are. A natural solution. A population swap. That is what happened between India and Pakistan in 1948. And that is what happened between Turkey and Greece earlier in the 20th century. And there are no more refugees there.

        Why do you loonie lefties always insist on ideological solutions rather than practical solutions?

        Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          Kiwi, you don’t have to be dishonest and slanderous against Palestinan refugees. You know very well that Israel wouldn’t allow them to return for demographics reasons even if they were as peaceful as Arab Israelis or angels.

          It’s all about a Jewish majority no matter how achieved. So what other inhuman measures would you support in Israel’s case, Kiwi?

          Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            Where was I dishonest?Read my natural solution bit again, David T. Population swap. It already happened.

            Why should the solution in Palestine be different than what it was in Pakistan-India and Turkey-Greece? Give us just one good reason.

            Reply to Comment
    13. ***It is the Palestinians who were part of the Arab colonial, imperialistic, conquering, enslaving, racist people who took over Israel, Syria, Iraq and the whole Maghreb.***

      Dear G-d. Pedro. By your “reasoning” modern Germany should continue to be punished for the Holocaust and Milosevic was right about punishing Muslims for the Ottoman Empire.

      The Palestinians that were the victims of Zionism were innocent in any suffering European Jews underwent or anything the Caliphate did in the ME.

      No wonder twits like you see no problem with collective punishment.

      Reply to Comment
    14. Pedro X

      Gert, you are again trying to obfuscate the truth. Palestine asked if Israelis are not colonial invaders and then stated that

      “A group of immigrants from Europe with pure colonial ambitions who have been ethnically cleansing the indigenous population for decades what does that make them?
      European settlers!”

      I merely pointed out to Palestinian that it is not the Jews who colonized the country. Israelis are indigenous to Israel. Palestinians were part of Arab peoples who did colonize the area.

      The Jews in 1947 did not choose war. The Arabs did and sought to eliminate the emerging Jewish state and commit genocide against the Jewish people in a holy war. The Palestinian Arabs did not succeed and fled their homes and villages.

      And you are wrong about Palestinian Arabs have no part in the suffering of Europeans. The Palestinian leaders were complicit with the German destruction of the Jewish people in Europe. Hundreds of thousands of Jews died as a result of the efforts of the Mufti Amin al-Husseini. Husseini personally blocked the deal to rescue of 15,000 Jewish children from the camp at Theresienstadt. The Mufti supported the Germans in the Holocaust from beginning to end and planned a similar Holocaust of Jews in Israel. He and his fellow Palestinians got their chance in 1947 to put into action what they wanted to do. They failed and instead caused a catastrophe to his own people. Other Palestinians did not oppose the Mufti but joined with him for the intended genocide.

      The Palestinians were victims of their own genocidal intentions.

      Reply to Comment
    15. David T.

      Yeah, sure. In Pedro’s private world:

      1.) Jews who immigrated to Palestine are indigenous, but not the Palestinians who lived there for more than 10 centuries.
      2.) “Jews” did not choose war, but took over most of Palestine and established their state peacefully and in accordance with the majority of its population.

      The then US diplomat Robert McClintock regarding a truce proposal at the end of April 1948 which the Arab states excepted has a different view:

      “The Jewish Agency refusal [of the truce] exposes its aim to set up its separate state by force of arms – the military action after May 15 will be conducted by the Haganah with the help of the terrorist organizations, the Irgun and LEHI, [and] the UN will face a distorted situation. The Jews will be the real aggressors against the Arabs, but will claim they are only defending the borders of the state, decided upon … by the General Assembly.”

      3.) Palestinians as such (not only the 3000 who followed the Mufti) had genocidal intentions and none of them were expelled but they all fled their homes after failing to commit genocide.

      It’s quite interesting that Holocaust deniers, too, are always trying to blame the victims. You caught their spirit very well, Pedro X.

      Reply to Comment
    16. Aaron Gross

      A very well-written article. I think this is one area where the Arab (or Palestinian) Israelis and the Israeli right aren’t too far apart. Lots of people on the right seem to respect the fact that Arab Israelis are not loyal to the Zionist regime. The attitude goes back to Jabotinsky: don’t expect Arabs to love you after you’ve taken their homeland.

      Personally, I’d like to see a clearer distinction between loyalty and obedience. Israeli Arabs are, on the whole, disloyal and obedient to the regime. A glass half full.

      Reply to Comment
    17. bor

      “Why are Palestinian citizens expected to be loyal to Israel?”

      Is Rami Younis actually Avigdor Lieberman?

      Reply to Comment
    18. Average American

      Very interesting. Loyalty to a different state. In USA we have a question about the loyalty of our Congresspeople. At every election, each candidate states publicly how much they love Israel. Why would they do this universally? Only if it were enforced. And AIPAC? The enforcer. Want campaign contributions from AIPAC, Congressman? Want to be able to borrow money from Federal Reserve Bank, Obama? Show us you love Israel.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        Here we go again.

        Average Arab (who pretends to be American) is complaining about the Israeli lobby but he keeps quiet about the Arab lobby who are very active and who use their oil wealth to buy the media, to infiltrate American Universities, to buy rent-a crowds and to promote the new religion of Israel hatred and to prop up politicians who support the Arab cause.

        Oh and I nearly forgot to mention the most obnoxious bit. Arab oil money is used to set up Arab sleeper cells which they activate from time to time to perpetrate home grown terror. As if to say to the American people: “watch out don’t support them Jews, or this will happen to you …”

        Never forget 9/11.

        Reply to Comment
    19. Click here to load previous comments