US Israel-Palestine policy

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,623
Barghouti speaks for himself. Just as there are different strains of Socialism and Conservatism, there are different strains of BDS.
Evidence? Link? Please?

(Btw we're not talking about idiots just going along mindlessly, unthinking, with the movement, putting their weight behind it, without properly understanding what it actually is that they're supporting. Or in any case purporting to have a different understanding of what it is they are supporting.)
 


Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
59,083
I support Boycotting, Divesting from and Sanctions against Israel until there is a peace deal with the Palestinians. Then I will gladly treat them as a normal country.

I can't and won't support Administrative Detention, which is another form of internment, but crueller since it includes small children. I won't support parallel justice systems, with Arabs subject to military courts (that turn a blind eye to police and army brutality) and Jews having access to Israeli civilian courts. I won't support the current de facto ban on Arab construction in East Jerusalem. To support this would be to support Apartheid.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
59,083
On twitter Mairav Zonszein has tweeted that Congress members who refuse to go on AIPAC organised trips to Israel have problems bringing their bills to the House floor.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
52,506
Taking the lands of indigenous people and renaming it in the conqueror's own image and language was always a feature of colonialism and imperialism.

It is dispiriting to find it still happening in the 21st century.


There is a great Irish play on this theme - Brian Friel's Translations, set in 1833, when a team of British Army cartographers arrive in an Irish village to survey and map the area.
 

Golah veNekhar

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
3,269
Evidence? Link? Please?

(Btw we're not talking about idiots just going along mindlessly, unthinking, with the movement, putting their weight behind it, without properly understanding what it actually is that they're supporting. Or in any case purporting to have a different understanding of what it is they are supporting.)
BDS is an extremely board based campaign however there is one area where it is often authoritarian- and that is talking about how Jewish cultural pathologies and Rabbinic Judaism have shaped the whole horror that has been Zionist colonialism in Palestine. It is this hyper-sensitivity to Jewish feelings, however neurotic, that holds back Palestinian solidarity campaigns however I have to agree Palestinian "marketing" is crap.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
59,083
BDS is an extremely board based campaign however there is one area where it is often authoritarian- and that is talking about how Jewish cultural pathologies and Rabbinic Judaism have shaped the whole horror that has been Zionist colonialism in Palestine. It is this hyper-sensitivity to Jewish feelings, however neurotic, that holds back Palestinian solidarity campaigns however I have to agree Palestinian "marketing" is crap.
In many Western countries, Palestine has been made the fallguy for western guilt over the Holocaust. This hasnt been the case in neutrals like Ireland and Sweden because we had no hand in it. Handing over Palestinians property to Jewish refugees was seen as making amends for the Holocaust. But in the process the rights of the Arab population were disregarded, in clear violation of the promises in the Balfour Declaration that the rights of the Arab population would be respected.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
52,506
In many Western countries, Palestine has been made the fallguy for western guilt over the Holocaust. This hasnt been the case in neutrals like Ireland and Sweden because we had no hand in it. Handing over Palestinians property to Jewish refugees was seen as making amends for the Holocaust. But in the process the rights of the Arab population were disregarded, in clear violation of the promises in the Balfour Declaration that the rights of the Arab population would be respected.
This is true up to a point, but I think there is more to be said:

(1) Ireland is not blameless for the dead of the Holocaust. The Irish Free State slammed the door on Jews trying to flee Germany. Our Envoy in Berlin in the 1930s, a convert to Catholicism called Charles Bewley, was a rank anti-Semite and reported events in Germany in a light that always favoured the Nazis. Bewley refused visas to fleeing Jews.


The rot extended back to Dublin. Even the influential Briscoes (originally LIthuanian Jews), with a Fianna Fail TD in the family, could not get visas for their relatives, who perished in the Holocaust.

Yes, of course, we were not the worst. But let no one tell you we were a Shining Light either.

For (2) see the next post.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
52,506
In many Western countries, Palestine has been made the fallguy for western guilt over the Holocaust. This hasnt been the case in neutrals like Ireland and Sweden because we had no hand in it. Handing over Palestinians property to Jewish refugees was seen as making amends for the Holocaust. But in the process the rights of the Arab population were disregarded, in clear violation of the promises in the Balfour Declaration that the rights of the Arab population would be respected.
(2) Yes, of course the rights of the indigenous Arab population were disregarded. All the victorious Allies were white colonialists, and taking land from brown people was done with hardly a second thought.

The first Jewish National Home proposed (by Theodore Herzl) was Uganda - not Wyoming, or West Australia, which were areas of white occupation. "Israel" was always going to be outside areas whites had reserved for themselves.

The British had been cynically transferring land titles since they took the Palestinian mandate after World War I - until the Palestinians revolted in the 1930s, ushering in a period of communal violence that died away during the war.

One the other hand, transfer of European populations was not uncommon in the strife-torn period 1918 to 1948. Both Turkey and the Balkan States transferred millions in population during the 1920s. After World War II, millions of Germans were expelled from Eastern Europe. Stalin exiled the Chechens to Siberia, before letting them return. He also transferred Poles onto former German lands, and transplanted Ukrainians in their place.

Even in the 1990s, millions of former Yugoslavs were forced to free their homes for other ones within the former state. And there is little likelihood they will ever return to their former homes.

These are "facts on the ground", and history cannot easily be reversed. The Palestinian Right of Return may be moral, but is it practical? If you (in theory) implemented it, are you going to transplant millions of descendants of Holocaust survivors beck to Europe, to Germany, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine and the Baltic States? And a million or so Russian emigrants back to Russia?
 
Last edited:

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
59,083
Jared Kushner had a bridge to sell to the Palestinians.

Well it would at least be an improvement of the poverty that's there now. The problem is as we have seen with the EU funded schools in the West Bank a few weeks ago that there is no guarantee the IDF doesnt turn up with the Caterpillar bulldozers to knock down this much vaunted new infrastructure Kushner is promising.

Kushner's plan reminds me a little of the Conservative party's policy of "Killing Home Rule with Kindness" in Ireland the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This policy was pushed by Prime Ministers Lord Salisbury and Arthur Balfour, and also supported from the backbenches by Lord Randolph Churchill (who said "Ulster will fight and Ulster will be right) and some Southern Unionists like the Earl of Midleton. This policy involved making concessions to the Irish tenant farmers by addressing the land question. It might or might not have succeeded in cementing the Union had 1916 not intervened, but it certainly did resolve the sectarian element of land ownership in Ireland.
 

brughahaha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
16,466
In many Western countries, Palestine has been made the fallguy for western guilt over the Holocaust. This hasnt been the case in neutrals like Ireland and Sweden because we had no hand in it. Handing over Palestinians property to Jewish refugees was seen as making amends for the Holocaust. But in the process the rights of the Arab population were disregarded, in clear violation of the promises in the Balfour Declaration that the rights of the Arab population would be respected.

Yep ..from the off , the arabs were written out of the equation as if the land was empty

The slogans were , "a land without people for a people without land" as if the Palestinians never existed - which to the bigoted neo nazi zionists , they don't

And when that started to be obviously wrong it became " Israel where the Jews made the desert bloom"
The implied racist lie was that previously , this was some wasteland because of those lazy workshy natives ( a recurring theme the Irish , Slavs and African Americans will recognise from various colonial and racist endeavours from Empires through the Nazis all the way to Apartheid South Africa and lastly Israel)

In fact the Levant has always been the fertile crescent, where Palestinians farmed successfully for centuries , before being cleared for the new arrivals.

But its all so clearly part of the standard colonial handbook of lies to disparage the natives and steal the land

Yet funnily the Jews who hark back 2,000 years think the Palestinians will forget in 2 generations ...Priceless!!

Of course Germany is one of Israels biggest supporters ..why wouldnt it be , considering if the European Jews were to be given any land after the Holocaust it should have been somewhere like Bavaria that was ethnically cleansed .....not the poor innocent Palestinians , who are still paying the price on behalf of the Germans
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
52,506
Yes, "the Palestinians" never existed.
Strange you should say that, but it is just bog-standard vacuous rhetoric.

The South Africans had another Myth of the Empty Land, that no people lived in South Africa before whites arrived.

It had no more truth that the Israeli "Myth of the Empty Land" for Palestine.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
52,506
Well it would at least be an improvement of the poverty that's there now. The problem is as we have seen with the EU funded schools in the West Bank a few weeks ago that there is no guarantee the IDF doesnt turn up with the Caterpillar bulldozers to knock down this much vaunted new infrastructure Kushner is promising.

Kushner's plan reminds me a little of the Conservative party's policy of "Killing Home Rule with Kindness" in Ireland the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This policy was pushed by Prime Ministers Lord Salisbury and Arthur Balfour, and also supported from the backbenches by Lord Randolph Churchill (who said "Ulster will fight and Ulster will be right) and some Southern Unionists like the Earl of Midleton. This policy involved making concessions to the Irish tenant farmers by addressing the land question. It might or might not have succeeded in cementing the Union had 1916 not intervened, but it certainly did resolve the sectarian element of land ownership in Ireland.
I think it was one of the Chief Secretaries Arthur Balfour who said "Of course, it it not our intention to kill Home Rule with kindness" when he was passing a Land Purchase Act, but the phrase was so good that it stuck.

There is a parallel, but the Land Acts created a class of independent property-owning farmers who were the mainstay of Irish Nationalism for the following century. If the Kushner Plan follows the same route, it will a boost for Palestinian Nationalism, not the reverse. Do you think the Israelis would allow a Palestinian economy that would rival competitive sectors of its own economy?

My guess is that the "investment" will be to bind the West Bind more tightly into the Israeli economy, with Israeli areas getting the biggest economic injection, since they already have ownership of the prime land. The "infrastructure" will facilitate the servicing of the Israeli economy by Palestinian workers.
 

font

Active member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
263
Strange you should say that, but it is just bog-standard vacuous rhetoric.
Nothing like that. It means just a simple historical fact: there never were people in the region, called "Palestinians", neither were people who called themselves "Palestinians". The word "Palestinians" simply didn't exist. Nothing to do with "empty land".
The South Africans
Irrelevant.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
52,506
Nothing like that. It means just a simple historical fact: there never were people in the region, called "Palestinians", neither were people who called themselves "Palestinians". The word "Palestinians" simply didn't exist. Nothing to do with "empty land".

Irrelevant.
There were never people in the region calling themselves "Israelis" either, before 1948, so your argument is a total ****-up.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
52,506


When the document was released, many noticed that the 40-page plan was void of any political context with the words "occupation", "freedom", "equality", "blockade" missing.

"The absence of those words is actually quite glaring and it's very indicative of what they see is the issue," Diana Buttu a Haifa-based analyst and former legal adviser to Palestinian peace negotiators told Al Jazeera.

"They've put together this optimal, pie-in-the-sky plan that any person who's involved in economic development would love to see. But it's not applicable to Palestine because they've taken away the political context."
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
14,657
In many Western countries, Palestine has been made the fallguy for western guilt over the Holocaust. This hasnt been the case in neutrals like Ireland and Sweden because we had no hand in it. Handing over Palestinians property to Jewish refugees was seen as making amends for the Holocaust. But in the process the rights of the Arab population were disregarded, in clear violation of the promises in the Balfour Declaration that the rights of the Arab population would be respected.
And guilt over the holocaust has caused a reflexive fear of appearing anti semitic.

Right now there is justifiable concern that zionists are pushing America towards war with Iran, but no mainstream politician or media outlet will call out the zionists because of the fear of being "anti-semitic".

The obsessive fear of being deemed "anti semitic" is having potentially disastrous consequences.
 

font

Active member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
263
There were never people in the region calling themselves "Israelis" either, before 1948, so your argument is a total ****-up.
F***ing bullshit.
"Israelis" are citizens of Israel. The name of the people is "Jews", "the Jewish people".
"Palestinian people" didn't exist until the Jewish state was created..
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
59,083
F***ing bullshit.
"Israelis" are citizens of Israel. The name of the people is "Jews", "the Jewish people".
"Palestinian people" didn't exist until the Jewish state was created..
There is a 25% Israeli Arab minority so you are wrong to equate Israelis with Jews. Furthermore nearly half of the Jews live outside Israel.
 


Top Bottom