Archive article: https://archive.ph/LJPiZ
A new survey showing that 82 percent of Jewish Israelis support the expulsion of Gazans was met with disbelief among those who stubbornly believe that the extremists are outliers. But these trends are as consistent as they are shocking
There is no both siding this, the Zionists are genocidal and there are no good zionists. This should be shocking to nobody. Im Jewish and ill say this as many times as I need to
ANTIZIONISM IS NOT ANTISEMITISM
When this voluntary migration plan succeeds and the world becomes a beautiful terrorism free utopia, you antizionists are going to look pretty stupid.
Edit: Wait!!! Are you about to downvote me because you’re a zionist, an antizionist who doesn’t understand irony, or something else? I can’t not know!
Ok reactionary
This just in: The country that has been doing ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians for 77 years is still okay with doing ethnic cleansing.
They’ve literally been doing this shit since they pushed the Palestinians out of the way almost eighty fucking years ago. Of course the population is okay with it.
My understanding is that Israeli TV is hugely responsible for making this mainstream. Just like in Rwanda where radio played a huge role in the genocide.
It’s almost as if genocide scholars have been warning about a series of patterns over the last couple of years…
The genocidal ideology of zionism is their hegemonic narrative. It’s much bigger than just TV. It’s also the schools, politicians, cops/prisons, compulsory terrorism, etc. Genocide is the basis of their entire “society”.
I don’t think that’s fair, they do absolutely teach Zionism from a young age, but it’s not specifically genocide. Watched an interesting documentary recently about Jews in America and how they’re raised, it’s basically once you get pushed into the IDF THEN the genocide love starts being actively spread.
they do absolutely teach Zionism from a young age,
once you get pushed into the IDF THEN the genocide love starts being actively spread.
So they learn to hate from a young age, reinforced by mandatory military service (for both genders, they’re very egalitarian)… and then they grow up to accept genocide… but they’re not taught to be genocidal in school so it’s ok… got it.
Lmfao straw man, when did I once say that it was OK?
Serious question, how much of this has to do with hamas not releasing the hostages. I would imagine they’d be hearing and talking bout getting their people back constantly.
It’s hard to say. With or without hostages, October 7 was extremely traumatic; and came in the context of a population already primed to be suspicious of Palestinians. In particular, the West Bank ethnic cleansing was already well underway with the tacit support of the general population; as although for most people that support was more about apathy than proactive support. Looking at how the US lost its shit for decades after 9/11, it is clear that hostages are not necessary for that to happen. Israel has also to deal with follow up attacks, which has a way of keeping trauma fresh.
Regarding the role of the hostages in this case, the first thing to acknowledge is that the actual response by Israel has not prioritized the hostages. Critical members of Israel’s current governing coalition have threatened to leave over prior attempts at a hostage deal. This has lead a serious rift developing between the current government and many of the hostage families.
However, from a propaganda side, the hostages have been a major assesset to the current government (both internationally and domestically). Most people are simply not that engaged in politics. We have heard repeatedly from Israeli military leadership that there are no achievat military goals left in Gaza. However, it is hard for that message to break through when the other side can point to the hostages and say “freeing those people is our goal”. Nevermind the fact that everyone paying attention knows that military action is not an effective tool of hostage release [0] and almost all of the freed hostages have been freed as a result of diplomacy.
[0] It can be useful for leverage in negotiations; but Israel is well past the point needed for that.
Hamas should free the hostages. Frankly, they should have never taken non-combatant hostages in the first place. That was absolutely a crime.
Most of October 7 was a crime, even without the hostages. Taking the hostages was itself a crime, and continuing to hold them continues to be a crime.
The question of what Hamas “should” do is more complicated. Clearly following international law is not a priority for them, so that justification goes out the window.
In terms of actually advancing their interests, I don’t see much benefit to them. Their biggest asset in Israeli domestic politics are the hostages. The political pressure in Israel to free them is real, and the decision makers all know that a deal is the only way to meet that. Further, a not insignificant portion of the population oppose the war in it’s current form specifically because of the hostages. The only wins Hamas has gotten has been through hostage negotiations.
In exchange for giving all of that up, Hamas gets a slight benefit in the PR war. It is a very hard sell to say that is a good trade.
If you want Hamas to free the hostages, you need to get to a point where “Hamas should free the hostages” is true from the perspective of Hamas. Then, you can work on convincing them it is true. The good news is that Hamas is very amenable to the idea that releasing hostages is in their interest. That is the entire reason you take hostages: to get some benefit by releasing them.
I am using “should” in a moral sense, according to my own moral compass. I mean that according to my own morality they “should do the right thing”. Nothing beyond that.
That said, I agree with your analysis entirely.
Netanyahu want to continue the genocide even after hostages are released . Don’t tell the oppressed what to do when the west been ignoring 57 years of occupation and dozens of atrocities like 7 of October through history .
You should ask for Israel to end occupation, allow a one or two state solution then bring people responsible of atrocities on both side
Go through my comment history buddy, you’re preaching to the choir. The fact that the Israeli apartheid regime is committing genocide is one thing. The fact that Hamas should not have taken non-combatant hostages is another. And sorry but no, I refuse to identify Hamas with “the oppressed”. They are fanatics propped up by slave-owners in the Gulf and politically useful idiots of the Israeili apartheid regime.
You are an idealist ignoring history and human psychology .It would be cool if there was a resistance group that do not target any civilians and do not get money from shady group. This was never the case. I can got in history and see ton of massacre commited by the oppressed due to oppresion. Like nana sahib in india promising safety to a bunch of british civilians amd soldier and ending up massacring them.
Palestinians won’t stay silence and keep hearing the useless both commited attrocities bs , waiting arabs and west countries to help which they will never do.
I don’t support hamas, i support their actions against the idf terrorists only
Talking about a useful idiot, that’s the palestinian autority collaborating with israel while israel arm and protect violent terrorists settlers and expanding settlements
You are so hardcore and knowledgeable of human history and psychology. So hardcore. Yea.
Look buddy. The world fucking sucks, right? People do horrible things. People are locked into doing horrible things. People are desperate, and brutalized and traumatized and beaten down. You can look at that and say, yea that’s how it is.
Or you can look at it and say We Should Do Better. You call that idealism? Good. In a world where reality is becoming more brutal by the hour, maybe a little idealism is what exactly we need.
Given the thousands of Palestinians taken hostage by Israel both before and after Oct 7, the vast majority of which are non-combatants and are held in nightmarish conditions. How else would Hamas negotiate for their release except via a hostage exchange? Are they supposed to just give up the only bargaining chip they have?
I don’t appreciate these “what else should they do” questions. I’ve been debating pro-zionist trolls for two years now and I no longer accept even their premise. I’m not going to turn around and apply it to Hamas.
I think holding hostages for the sake of getting your own people back from a genocidal ethnostate is maybe a little more justifiable then Zionist apologia for genocide. But maybe that’s just me.
If we are talking about combatants, sure. I would not flinch a moment. But civilians? Kids? Nah bro, don’t go there.
Since the steps for Palestinian genocide started before Oct 7, and the IDF has been okay with killing their own hostages in high-yield strikes, not likely.
Considering they’re carpet-bombing the place it’ll be interesting to know if there any hostages left… of course they’ll blame hamas.
For years Israel has been running around the world, waving their foes statements about “pushing Israel into the sea” as a call to arms against atrocity.
And now here they are, committing that very atrocity. But genocide seems inevitable when your stated goal is to be an ethnostate.
Wow, highlighting the fact they’re a genocidal theocratic ethnostate without highlighting the good things.
Like how they invented tomatoes hummus and fizzy water, or how good they are at exterminating the brutes!
Clearly just an antisemite. There’s no behavior the jewish people could do that would be good enough for you, short of completely stopping the genocide¹, and abandoning their entire 5000 year old culture, which is suspiciously close to lemkin’s original definition of genocide. Stopping the genocide is genocide. You people just cant stop wanting to genocide jews, can you? Antisemites make me sick.
¹which the hamas people are doing to themselves actually. Tge idf has never been outside the city of jerusalem, and actually mostly just makes music videos, check them out on social media!
You build a state out of colonialism, you get a state of colonialists.
as someone with Israeli friends, I always figured this to be the case. they bemoan having to think about bomb shelters because of the occasional rocket that gets fired over into israel. they legitimately believe that Muslim countries hate them, and Muslims in general want to kill them. they live in the Old testament of the Bible, and anything that happens to Gaza is the will of God.
they legitimately believe that Muslim countries hate them, and Muslims in general want to kill them
This is plausible, but not entirely without a reason. I stopped taking sides in this mess long ago.
Jews and Muslims have had many extensive periods of peace living together (including in Palestine before the state of Israel). The story of Islamic-Jewish hostilities is actually fairly recent and shorter than you’d expect.
Antisemitism as we know it today is mostly a European export to the Middle East.
“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.”
— David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938
Counter-argument: 7oct attacks wasn’t a defense operation. Before you tell me that it was a revenge or “didn’t happen in a vacuum”, then, again, this is why I refuse to take a clear side as both sides have done terrible things. I’d understand them hitting settlers, but fucking tourists enjoying a concert? Naah. Let them fight it out, I have problems of my own (I’m from East Europe with looming russian invasion)
You’d be wrong though. Hamas targeted soldiers not tourists. You are blaming the deaths resulting from the Hannibal Directive on Hamas.
Putting Hannibal Directive aside. Let’s say if Russian troops occupied your country for a number of years or decades and eventually hosted a concert on your former hometown, then some resistance group ended up killing some tourists at the concert during the crossfire. Would you be both-siding it?
Let’s assume you would view both sides: the invaders and the resistance as bad, would that justify a genocide?
Honestly, as a history buff, you don’t make much sense to me. Look up what Roman empire did in that region and how name Palestine came to be (around 300ce). You might realize how calling me wrong in that context is pretty ignorant. I’m staying centric.
Another fun reading for you: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ancient_Israel_and_Judah
How is this relevant to 2025? But because you brought it up, here’s a quote by none other than Israel’s first prime minister.
“The fellahin are not descendants of the Arab conquerors, who captured Eretz Israel and Syria in the seventh century CE. The Arab victors did not destroy the agricultural population they found in the country. They expelled only the alien Byzantine rulers, and did not touch the local population. Nor did the Arabs go in for settlement. Even in their former habitations the Arabs did not engage in farming…their whole interest in the new countries was political, religious and material: to rule, to propagate Islam, and to collect taxes…the Jewish farmer, like any other farmer, was not easily torn from his soil…Despite the repression and suffering the rural population remained unchanged.” [7]
Also the Roman Exile ended with the Muslim conquest of the Levant.
In 638 CE the Byzantine Empire lost control of the Levant. The Arab Islamic Empire under Caliph Omar conquered Jerusalem and the lands of Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Egypt. As a political system, Islam created radically new conditions for Jewish economic, social, and intellectual development.[132] Caliph Omar permitted the Jews to reestablish their presence in Jerusalem–after a lapse of 500 years.[133] Jewish tradition regards Caliph Omar as a benevolent ruler and the Midrash (Nistarot de-Rav Shimon bar Yoḥai) refers to him as a “friend of Israel”.[133]
So how again are you staying a centrist on a genocide of the indigenous peoples by foreign settlers? Mr./Mrs. History Buff? Does it make sense to go near 2000 years to justify a genocide when the modern settlers aren’t even from the region? Would you do the same and say Russians are Balto-Slavic people and returning to their ancestral lands? There’s more a more recent genetic and historical presence in Eastern Europe for Russians than there is for Zionist settlers in Palestine.
The origin and migration of Slavs in Europe between the 5th and 10th centuries AD:
How is this relevant to 2025?
Because it borderline sounded like you claimed Jews simply appeared there during WW2 and started occupying whatever they could. That is factually wrong as there is a deep Jewish history to said region. And before you throw some genetic argument at me about how those are Europeans that migrated here, understand that Jews are ethnoreligious group, not a genetic group like slavs. It doesn’t matter if you, a muslim, were born in opposite side of the world. There is a place where it will be always sacred for you, a home, written in blood and history, a home disregarded by many, but then those many keep finding Jewish artifacts there.
Your upcoming quote pretty much confirmed what I’m trying to say.
Does it make sense to go near 2000 years to justify a genocide when the modern settlers aren’t even from the region?
I was quite clear about “both sides are terrible”. That is in no way justification for any of their actions, it roughly translates to “This shit is fucked up so hard from all sides that I can’t get morally invested in this for my own sanity and rather focus on my own region”. If you actually assumed that I’m supporting Israel’s actions, then you haven’t been following what I’m saying.
There’s more a more recent genetic and historical presence in Eastern Europe for Russians than there is for Zionist settlers in Palestine.
But the thing is, that argument is never used in real life, by anyone, and so you’re not hearing counter-arguments. No one is saying that Russia wants to take over Baltics because genetic or historical presence. That is simply not an argument here, and I don’t think you fully understand what “Slav” is, as it’s not some Russian origins. At least I’m not aware of it. I also never claimed that about Israel and Gaza (you keep assuming things, falsely). Israel has expanded far beyond what is theirs.
Yeah to be fair this is true, and I bet a lot of the Palestinians would wish for all the Israelis to leave
Wouldn’t you? I don’t think anyone would be okay with being relegated to less than 20% of their land by foreign invaders
To be fair, the Palestinians had not choice in their occupying force and would have realised any group taking their land and displacing them.
They are not wrong though, there are plenty of Muslims in the surrounding states that believe Jewish people are evil and should be exterminated, not because of anything happening in the real world but because they are being told that they’ll have to fight and kill them during the end times anyway.
What a stupid comment.
Jew lived in yemen - Iraq - Palestine - Egypt - Morocco - Iran for hundred of years. Saying Arab hate jew is propaganda.
The hate is for Israeli and those who supported them through the year while they genocide - destroy villages- cites- farms- didnt allow people to go back home… in fact they kick them out of their own home and allowing an American zionist Jew to just take the land.
They build shelter because they know they are a colony and sooner or later people of the land will attempt to get them back. Not because “Arab hate them”
Jews lived in these countries not as equal citizens with full rights, but as second class citizens who had to endure centuries of oppression. There’s a reason why the moment Israel formed, all these countries committed some of the worst pogroms in history and expelled their Jewish populations. Around 1 million Jews in the muslim had their property, communities, and citizenship stripped from them for the crime of being Jewish… even though they had no connection to Israel whatsoever. Since Israel was the only place to take to them in, that’s where they ended up going.
Also it’s inaccurate to say “Arabs hate Jews” because Arab is an ethnicity. There are a lot of Arab Jews and being Arab is not tied to any ideology. It’s more accurate to say “mulsims hate Jews” because are tied to an ideology, islam, and the islamic scriptures are very explicit that Jews are evil and should be either killed or treated as second class citizens… hence how the Jews in the countries above were living in such unjust conditions in the countries above prior to the creation of Israel.
Yet Jews had their Golden Age in Spain under Muslim rule and returned to Jerusalem after a 500 year Roman exile after the Muslim conquest of the Levant.
They were lured to Israel but with the exception of Egypt they weren’t expelled. Iraq went as far as prohibiting Jews from leaving and the Mossad did false flag attacks to encourage them to leave secretly.
Yet Jews had their Golden Age in Spain under Muslim rule and returned to Jerusalem after a 500 year Roman exile after the Muslim conquest of the Levant.
What golden age lmao? islam is crystal clear that it has to be established as the superior religion of the land and that all the religions under it must be treated as inferior by having them be subjugated to additional restrictions like having to pay a jizya tax and being treated as second class citizens. Btw this only applies to religions that fall under the label of “people of the book”, aka, Abrahamic monotheistic religions. Other religions, like European Paganism or Hinduism didn’t get anything, islam says that they should either be killed, forced to convert to islam, or taken in as slaves.
Until the West started protecting them after WWII, Jews were not treated well for centuries. They’re still not treated well today. Several muslim countries today still don’t allow Jews to live inside their borders.
They were lured to Israel but with the exception of Egypt they weren’t expelled. Iraq went as far as prohibiting Jews from leaving and the Mossad did false flag attacks to encourage them to leave secretly.
I’m actually from Iraq so I actually understand what happened more than you. You see, Jews in Iraq were always subject to oppression, discrimination, and violence. Whenever something goes bad in the country, religious and ethnic minorities like Jews, Christians, and Kurds face the wrath of events called “farhud”. The word loosely translates to “looting” but the actual translation is pogrom. A farhud is when you get a huge mob of angry muslims going into minority neighborhoods and towns and destroying everything. They would kill people, kindnap women, destroy their houses/businesses/religious institutions, and they steal anything they can get their hands on. My family comes from an ethnoreligious minority in Iraq (called Mandaeism), and all the minorities in Iraq saw were subject to this type of violence after the 2003 US invasion.
Anyway, when it comes to the Jews in the country, in 1941 they suffered an extremely bad farhud. This was before the establishment of Israel, this was before the end of WWII, and this was during the holocaust. You see, during this time, muslim Arabs in general were very much fond of the Nazis. The Nazis and the muslim Arabs had a lot of shared goals and desires, they both hated the British/French and wanted to see them defeated, they both hated and wanted to exterminate Jews, and they both thought of themselves as superior and wanted to cleanse their lands of minorities.
The thing is at the time, Iraq was ruled by a royal family that was put there by the British, kind of like Jordan is today. This royal family was kind of supportive of the allies and they wanted to maintain a secular order that allows minorities. Iraqi Arab muslims (both sunni and shia) despised that so much so that there was enough support to foster a pro-Nazi fascist coup attempt in 1941. During the coup, the monarch at the time got ousted and was replaced by, Rashid Ali al-Gaylani, the fascist leader of the coup for a few months.
His reign was no stable but still, he had enough power to terrorize the Jews in Iraq. They were constantly subject to intimidation and violence where they would get their houses painted to mark them or told that they were being moved to detention camps asap. After a few months of this, the British sent in support to squash his regime and reestablish the monarchy, and they did. But the fascist regime’s defeat saw the country’s Arab muslim population rage and they accused the Jews and other minorities of supporting the British and their influence.
What ensued was two days of anarchy where the muslim population went into the Jewish neighborhoods of Baghdad (where most of Iraq’s Jews lived) and they committed one of the worst farhud’s in the country’s history. They killed hundreds, they injured thousands, they destroyed entire neighborhoods, and stole everything they could. Most of the Jews in the country either fled to other cities (which also had their own farhuds but not as bad) or to neighboring countries like Iran and Jordan. These people either stayed outside the country as refugees or were forced to go back despite the danger.
The antisemitism in Iraq was very strong even after WWII, and the Jews of the country were traumatized from what they went through so they lived their lives covertly. In the 1950s Mossad started their operations to get Jews to migrate to Israel, and at the time, they had shared interests with the muslims in the country. They both wanted to drive the Jews out of the country no matter what. And so another wave of terrorism took place, and this time the Jews packed their bags and left Iraq for good. Mostly to Israel as it was finally established and was the most welcoming place for them.
These people did nothing wrong, but they lost their homes, businesses, community (some of which are thousands of years old), and their citizenship. Why? Because they’re Jewish, that’s it. It doesn’t matter what terminology you use to describe what happened, the point is that these people were driven out of their countries and had nowhere to go but Israel. This wasn’t just the case in Iraq, but all over the muslim world. Nearly 1 million Jews had to relocate to Israel due persecution. This is why when people try to pretend that Israel/Palestine conflict is one sided are so mind numbingly ignorant.
What golden age lmao?
You may want to reattach your arse. Wikipedia has a whole article about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_age_of_Jewish_culture_in_Spain
Contrast that with how non-Jews faired and are fairing under Jewish rule. The Torah instructs the elimination of other people, just read what it says about the Amalekites and Midianites. The Jewish king of Yemen burnt 4000-20000 Christians. Israel today even before the genocide in Gaza subjugated Palestinians to brutal and humiliating rule, where they are imprisoned, tortured and forcefully evicted from their homes.
We are all aware of how brutal Christians have been to non-Christians, I don’t need to cite any examples.
This was before the establishment of Israel, this was before the end of WWII,
You are engaging in historical revisionism. Jews weren’t persecuted or expelled in Iraq, the Mossad engaged in false flag operations and smuggling of Jews. Zionism and Jewish migration to Palestine predate WW2 and the Holocaust, and the Mossad in various forms was active before 1948. Zionist gangs had already committed massacres against the Palestinians in the 1930s. The Iraqi government tried to prevent Jews from leaving. Iraq at the time was also under British mandate, it wasn’t an independent state. I suggest reading what Avi Shlaim an Iraqi Jewish scholar and historian wrote about it, you seem to be parroting the Zionist narrative without any evidence: https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2023/09/the-history-of-arab-jews-can-change-our-understanding-of-the-world
they both hated and wanted to exterminate Jews
The Nazis sure, but the Arab Muslims? That’s an ignorant take. You ignore 1500 years of Jewish history in the Arab and Muslim world and the influential role they played. And instead claim Muslims wanted to exterminate Jews based on violence that happened in reaction to Zionism, and use it as justification for Zionism. Completely ignoring the role of false flag attacks in the resulting chaos. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/avi-shlaim-proof-israel-zionist-involvement-iraq-jews-attacks European Jewish migration to Palestine started before WW2. Zionist violence against Palestinians was already a common occurrence in the 1930s. Zionists were already trying to lure Arab Jews to Palestine before the end of WW2. The only Arab government that expelled its Jews was Egypt as a consequence of the 1967 war after some were caught spying for Israel. Every other Arab government was either ambivalent or tried to stop Jewish migration to Palestine.
The antisemitism in Iraq was very strong even after WWII, and the Jews of the country were traumatized from what they went through so they lived their lives covertly.
How does that justify the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine? Palestinians had no say in the matter. Palestinians don’t owe Jewish people reparations for what happened to them in Egypt, Iraq or elsewhere. Arabs aren’t some generic people. If you were from Iraq, you should know that Iraq on its own is diverse with different factions with varying and conflicting interests. You can’t turn around and claim that Iraqis and Palestinians are generic Arabs and what Iraqis did to Jews, justify the crimes Israel is committing against Palestinians.
Palestine isn’t Iraq. What happened in Iraq doesn’t justify what’s happening in Palestine, even if you insist that the attacks weren’t false flags, which they were.
This is why when people try to pretend that Israel/Palestine conflict is one sided are so mind numbingly ignorant.
In the conflict between Israel and Palestine. there’s an aggressor and a victim. A colonizer and a colonized. What happened to Jews in Europe or other countries is not relevant and doesn’t justify the crimes and genocide they inflicted upon Palestinians.
PS: I recommend you read and watch what Avi Shlaim has to say about it. As an Iraqi Jew who has lived through that turbulent time and a historian he is far more qualified than someone who parrots Zionist propaganda and historical revisionism. His accounts are first hand and he is a historian. You repeat the same Zionist argument that justifies brutalizing Palestinians based on what happened in Iraq 80 years ago.
Palestine Talks | Professor Avi Shlaim says “anti-Semitism was an European, not Arab problem”
Not sure why you are lyao. Wikipedia has a whole article about it:
Did you even read the article? It clearly states what I stated. islam allows religious minorities that fall under “people of the book” label (aka, monotheistic Abrahamic religions) to exist under islam, not as equals but as inferior second class citizens with limited rights. This article just states that the persecution was worse for Jews in Christian Europe, not that things were good in Iberia. There are even a few historians in this very article that argue that this label for this time period doesn’t actually align with reality.
You are engaging in historical revisionism. Jews weren’t persecuted or expelled in Iraq
The Farhud of Baghdad, took place in 1941, that’s before the establishment of Israel (1948) and before the end of WWII (19450). Everything that I said, you could easily find in this article or any article about this event:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farhud
Zionism and Jewish migration to Palestine predate WW2 and the Holocaust, and the Mossad in various forms was active before 1948.
Yes, but Mossad didn’t try to get Jews in other countries to migrate to Israel until after Israel was established after the 1948 war.
Zionist gangs had already committed massacres against the Palestinians in the 1930s.
And vice versa.
Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre
The Iraqi government tried to prevent Jews from leaving. Iraq at the time was also under British mandate, it wasn’t an independent state.
You keep repeating this like a broken record, but all your doing is demonstrating your ignorance. The Iraq government forbade Jews from emigrating to Israel AFTER the 1948 war. The farhud happened in 1941, that’s 7 years prior. Also, this policy last two years and the Iraqi government reversed it in 1950, this was the called de-naturalization law
Iraq at the time was also under British mandate, it wasn’t an independent state.
The British mandate ended in 1932. Again, you keep spreading misinformation that can easily be fact checked with a single 10 second google search.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Iraq
I suggest reading what Avi Shlaim
He was born in 1945, the farhud happened in 1941. I know for a fact you didn’t read his memoir and you have no idea who this guy is. It doesn’t take an acadmic to figure that the article you posted is propaganda that bastardized his work. First of all, his memoir, Three Worlds: Memoirs of an Arab-Jew, mainly talks about the events AFTER 1948 when Israel was established and he talks about how he and his family were forced to migrate to Israel 1951 (He was 6 at the time). He states that during this time, Mossad was did a bunch of operations that tried to force Jews to migrate to Israel, and if you actually scroll up and read, you’ll see that I have mentioned all of these details.
The Nazis sure, but the Arab Muslims? That’s an ignorant take.
Don’t call something ignorant when you have no idea what you’re talking about. This isn’t some hidden secret or some controversial opinion, it’s literally fact. You can scroll through this list or the lists that continue it and find hundreds of examples of the Arab muslim world trying to get rid of Jews:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_antisemitism
This is also relevant:
You ignore 1500 years of Jewish history in the Arab and Muslim world and the influential role they played. And instead claim Muslims wanted to exterminate Jews based on violence that happened in reaction to Zionism
That’s precisely the issue, you’re ignoring 1400 (that’s how old islam is) of history for a bullshit narrative that’s not based in reality. This is a good example of that. The Farhud in Baghdad had NOTHING to do with zionism. You’re such a dunce that you cannot comprehend that antisemtism in the muslim world has existed LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG before the creation of Israel, and I literally gave you an example with the farhud. You’re not willing to accept the reality. If you think antisemtism in the muslim world started as a reaction to zionism, then your understand of this region is nonexistent.
European Jewish migration to Palestine started before WW2. Zionist violence against Palestinians was already a common occurrence in the 1930s. Zionists were already trying to lure Arab Jews to Palestine before the end of WW2.
I already covered this, so I’m going to move on to the next thing.
How does that justify the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine? Palestinians had no say in the matter. Palestinians don’t owe Jewish people reparations for what happened to them in Egypt, Iraq or elsewhere.
The entire point why I brought these people up is to showcase how these people are victims who ended up in Israel as a product of circumstance that was beyond their control. They weren’t there for “reparations” or as voluntary “colonialists” as your narrative likes to portray. This is like saying the Vietnamese refugees who fled to the US in the 70s and 80s after Vietnam’s neighboring countries kicked them out, only went to North America to colonize the Native Americans. It’s just an ignorant take on something that’s clearly more complex.
Arabs aren’t some generic people. If you were from Iraq, you should know that Iraq on its own is diverse with different factions with varying and conflicting interests.
Yes and no. You are correct in the sense that Arab culture is diverse and the ethnic groups that were Arabized through islamic imperialist conquest still remain distinct. However, Arab is still an ethnicity itself. It’s important to understand that despite the diversity, Arabs still view themselves as one. This is less true today because we’ve had around a century of Arabic states being independent, but after WWI, this was very much the case. Arabs back then didn’t see themselves as Saudi, Iraqi, or Syrian, etc. They thought of these new states as fake and they just saw themselves as Arabs in the Arab nation. It’s not inaccurate to talk about Arabs as a cohesive group, especially during the time period we’re discussing, because they did think and act as one nation.
Palestine isn’t Iraq. What happened in Iraq doesn’t justify what’s happening in Palestine, even if you insist that the attacks weren’t false flags, which they were.
You’re right in the first half, but you’re still missing the point in the second. It doesn’t matter if they were false flags, real flags, or no flags. What matters is that these events happened, and as a result of them, innocent people who done absolutely nothing wrong ended up in Israel by no fault of their own. What happened to the Palestinians during the Nakba was wrong, but what happened to the Jews in rest of Palestine and the muslim world at large was also wrong. These people and their descendants who are in Israel today deserve to be there as much as Palestinians deserve to be there. That’s why this conflict isn’t black and white.
In the conflict between Israel and Palestine. there’s an aggressor and a victim. A colonizer and a colonized. What happened to Jews in Europe or other countries is not relevant and doesn’t justify the crimes and genocide they inflicted upon Palestinians.
And this framing is wrong. It might be true today in the West Bank, it might be true back when Zionism was still only a movement, but from that point until today so much has happened that makes this narrative a gross misrepresentation of history. I’ll give you an example to demonstrate how using oversimplified revisionist narratives is bullshit. Anatolia for most of history was split between Armenians in the east and Greeks in the West. Then the Turks came in from central Asia and they committed a bunch genocides, colonized Anatolia, and became what is today Turkey. Turkey has yet to stop it’s colonization and genocidal efforts, and the effects of o all these events (past and present) can still be felt today.
Yet despite this, so much has happened in Turkey’s history that trying to boil it down to “Turkey bad” where the aggressor and the colonizer and Greece, Armenia, Kurdistan, etc are victims and the colonized is just ignorant. It ignores all the wars waged on by Greece or the Kurds or Armenia or the persecutions the Turks faced or the people who were forced to seek refugee in Turkey like Circassians and Tatars. It also ignores the fact that the Turks have been there for generations or that the people and government are not the same thing even if a portion of society supports the government. It doesn’t justify Turkey’s past or present atrocities, nor does it justify the atrocities against it, but you can’t operate from a narrative driven framework that’s not based in reality. The same applies here.
he is far more qualified than someone who parrots Zionist propaganda and historical revisionism.
History is not zionist propaganda. Though I suppose to someone who consumes nothing but propaganda such as yourself, actual history does seem like revisionist propaganda. Regardless, everything that I have said can easily be verified and sourced. If I forgot to source something, then just show me the claim and I’ll provide a source.
I recommend you read and watch what Avi Shlaim has to say about it. As an Iraqi Jew who has lived through that turbulent time
He literally hasn’t… how can he possibly experience an event when he wasn’t even born? Here’s a real account from an Iraqi Jew that did actually live through event:
I don’t even know what to say to you, but your interpretation of what I wrote is so over the top that I can just assume that you’re trolling. I especially liked the bit where you turned some Muslims into all Arabs, as if they are one and the same and all the same.
It’s also starting to get really obvious isn’t it? I mean, you really have to be provincial. I’m actually thinking of moving to the country and trying bigotry for a bit myself. You know, before we’ve missed it completely. It’s just that there’s a really good shawarma place round the corner from us here.
“lived”
Israel is an existential threat to its neighbors. The hate isn’t irrational. It’s perfectly reasonable.
And Palestine is being ethnically cleansed and genocided by the same apocalyptic Jewish and Christian thinking. Religious apocalypticism aside, in Palestine there is a clear victim and aggressor. You don’t even have to take my words for it. Take Israel’s first prime minister’s words:
“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.” — David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.
there are plenty of Muslims in the surrounding states that believe Jewish people are evil
plenty of non-Muslims too
Can you elucidate?
The tl;dr is that an antichrist-like figure, the Dajjal, will appear during the end times, leading to a battle between his followers and the righteous. The more extreme interpretations claim that all or almost all Jews will be on the Dajjal’s side. Example:
A Sahih hadith concerning Jews and one of the signs of the coming of Judgement Day has been quoted many times, (it became a part of the charter of Hamas).
The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (the Boxthorn tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.
Other groups mentioned as mostly falling to the Dajjal, depending who you ask, are singers and musicians (because music is sinful I’m assuming), Bedouins, women, Turks and probably many others. It’s just one of these things that lends itself to being instrumentalized.
It’s always some obscure quote from the hadith about some homicidal tree. Most Muslims, like the other Abrahamic faithful, are just trying to stop trans people from having abortions.
Jews are not central to the Dajjal (antichrist) story. It is only mentioned that his army of followers will have tens of thousands of Jews in it coming from the east (could be China, or anywhere between china and the Levant). The foretold events point to a post-“Israel” world.
The “tree” hadith is relevant. And the trees are not magical or “homicidal”. The hadith points to the high-tech military/surveillance apparatus turning on “Israel” at some point (with a single exception). The hadith just drew the picture in a way the people of the time could comprehend.
Between the aftermath of the “State of Israel” experiment, and the supposed appearance of the antichrist, it wouldn’t be surprising if many Jews, especially religious non-Zionist ones, sought refuge and lived among Muslims again, like they always did throughout history. Given the raising extreme vitriol against all Jews, in the west and elsewhere, in part due to the actions of the world Zionist-capitalist cabal, I would say this could be more likely to happen than not. This of course assumes that things will shake out in a way where Muslims, or some of them at least, will actually rule themselves, and the colonially-manufactured client mini-states of today will also be no more.
Maybe that cabal will switch sides at some point and go to China. And that’s how they will become a part of the antichrist movement. Or maybe not. The world could change many time over between the end of “Israel” and the supposed appearance of the antichrist. We don’t know.
My point was that it was a “hadith” quote, as opposed to being from the Quran. Muslims frequently ignore hadith or give them such a wide interpretation as to give them negligible relevance. To simply infer the active beliefs of real Muslim people, or any religious group, from literal interpretations of cherry picked passages of secondary religious texts is ignorant nonsense. (Especially in 2025 when can just ask them directly over a round of Fortnite.)
Even when considering the antichrist stories (which appear in the New Testament), core principles in the Quran state that “believing” Jews, Christians and Muslims (and maybe even unlabelled monotheists) will be rewarded by God (2:62), and warns Muslims against trying to judge or assume “belief” in others (49:12, 4:94). This message also appears throughout the teachings of Jesus (e.g. Matthew 7:1-5), who Muslims consider to be a prophet of God.
Even if we carefully and collectively decide to determine a group as “bad”. We can, and arguably should, do that without recourse to religious prophecy. For example, if we collectively decide (e.g. UN, ICJ, ICC) that the group is carrying out an ethnic cleansing or genocide, based on real world evidence, interpreting a hadith prophecy to support that doesn’t add weight in any objective sense.
Your argument seems to be that the Hadith is totally irrelevant. Hamas and the person you’re replying to seem to think otherwise. Maybe it isn’t irrelevant just because it isn’t in the Quran and has a passage about shouty trees in it? Religions are hardly consistent, especially at the fringes.
“they legitimately believe that Muslim countries hate them, and Muslims in general want to kill them”
Do you have any experience with the press in their neighboring countries? There are absolutely some sources pushing this narrative in the opinion sections from time to time. I used to read The Daily Star (Lebanon) to follow Israeli news from a non-Israeli perspective and would see this in that paper a few times a year.
By no means am I suggesting that the billions of Muslims uniformly want to kill Israelis but the percentage that does isn’t zero.
Yet Jews had their Golden Age in Spain during Muslim rule before the Reconquista.
This hate is easily explained by reading what Zionist leaders have said themselves:
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”
David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.
IMO A kid from Palestine put it best in my first IR class “Why did my grandparents have to lose their home and everything in it because of European anti-semitism?”
On the other hand, Israel is an existential threat to every nation around it. If there was an aggressive theocratic ethnostate expansionist threatening your border, wouldn’t you hate them?
Israel doesn’t just want Palestine. They want the West Bank, Gaza, and all or large chunks of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt. Expelling the Gazans from Gaza won’t solve this. The Israelis want to do the following:
-
Expel the Gazans just over the border into shanty towns in neighboring countries.
-
Some displaced people in those areas will inevitably sneak back over the border to carry out revenge attacks against the people that stole their homes.
-
When (2) happens, use that as a justification to invade neighboring countries and seize additional land.
Israel has been slowly expanding its borders this way for decades. They seize an area of land, declare it a military buffer zone, but then let their civilians move into the buffer zone. They use their own population as human shields, putting them in danger of attacks by displaced Arabs. Then when this happens, they use this as an excuse to expand their borders further.
If you had a psychopathic country for a neighbor, that intended to slowly gobble up your own nation bit by bit, wouldn’t you want them all dead?
Israel isn’t a theocratic state. Im not sure why you would even suggest that it was as their PM is not a religious figure.
Pedantry is the last refuge of the ignorant.
Im not being pedantic. If you think Israel is a theocratic state you have no idea what a theocracy is. If your understanding of philosophy is so underdeveloped what value could your opinion have?
-
Uh, no. They live in the living memory of the Six-Day War. I’m not going to defend the behavior of the current Israeli government, but in no way are they just living out the biases the Old Testament when they think neighboring Arab states are antagonistic to them. They remember 1967, and if you think that all neighboring Arab states have done a 180 from where they were then, you’re very much wrong.
1967 is notably two decades into the ethnonationalist colonial project that displaced many Palestinians from their homes.
You picked a bad start date for Arab/Jewish trouble in Palestine. You also appear to ignore how the other Arab states screwed over the Palestinians to keep them desperate.
But I didn’t comment to debate this. I commented to disabuse the notion that Israel is using the Iron Age to think what they think. Neither are the Arabs.
But they are stuck in the Iron Age. They believe God gave them Palestine.
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.
[emphasis mine]
The 1967 war was preemptive. Israel started it. Then again, they also started the 1948 war in November 1947 months before Arab armies got involved.
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/a-50-year-occupation-israels-six-day-war-started-with-a-lie/
If you know anything about the genocidal ideology of zionism, this should be absolutely no surprise. It’s always been like this. Haven’t people watched any interviews with zios? Don’t y’all know any zios? These people are brainwashed racists at best.
I know a Palestinian talking to Israelis on omegle . Most of them are so disgusting and racists.
This new documentary serie is cool https://youtu.be/AEiL_5h14pY
I noticed on LinkedIn that a ton of my former colleagues from Israel are now in the US. I think shifting demographics as progressives leave are a bigger part of the story than the shifting opinions these stories have been about.
The wider truth is that anyone who’s remotely sane or empathetic is driven out of the zio regime. I have a friend who grew up under the regime and resisted the mandatory terrorism. He was put in prison, then he was harassed and threatened with death until he fled to USA. This dude is an exceptionally great person and for that reason he was violently forced out.
So whom does that leave over there? Only the most genocidal wackos. Thus, this completely unsurprising poll.
Also work the other way around, Jewish people from around the world that don’t accept the genocide being committed on their name are not going to move to Israel, while tha ones that are OK and support it are more likely to move in and participate directly.
Yeah exactly. I was just thinking my kid will probably never see it because I can’t imagine visiting ever again.
Just like in Nazi Germany, the entire Israeli population is complicit.
Not to be super technical but “most” is not the same as “all”.
Removed by mod
It’s an oversimplification, but it’s like an older brother and a younger brother sharing a room. They hate each other. They’re always messing with each other’s stuff. The older brother knows better, but he’s angry and tends to be abusive. The younger brother knows he shouldn’t pick a fight, but can’t help himself. They’ve both been fighting so long that each feels justified in hurting the other.
Who’s at fault is the wrong question. Is it the 7 year old? He’s 7. Is it the 12 year old? He’s a kid too, just bigger and stronger. Both lack the maturity and empathy to be in charge and have the run of things. They’ve both proven they’re entirely incapable of being fair or kind to each other.
It’s the parents’ fault for letting it happen. Or in this case, enabling both kids and giving them tips and tricks for how to fight better.
We can’t expects Israel or Palestine to be the adults in the room. They aren’t. They can’t. We can’t expect ourselves to be the adults in the room. We’re watching these kids beat themselves bloody for our amusement.
Until someone puts their foot down and says enough is enough, nothing will change, but the person who says that and lays down their weapons probably gets killed. So this won’t end until one side exterminates the other.
more like a homeless guy coming into a child a house, kicking the family into the basement, feeding them scraps, and when he wants to make a game room in the basement coming down to torture/kill them all.
sometimes the starving family downstairs complain, and in response, he just kills a random family member, you know, seems fair.
and all the neighbours side when the psycho invader, and blame the family for complaining and not thinking about the poor guy who regularly tortures them. because he’s a human too.
This is the bit that I’ve had a hard time with. And, to put it in less snide allegorical terms: Israel is in many ways the “invader”. They took land, took homes, that weren’t theirs. That invasion has been justified through massive harm to their people, and the need for a “safe space” they can call their own. But while that’s the in-person justification by individuals, the backroom justification used to ship the weapons is achieving a “Western presence” in the middle east.
Something the Jewish community might not get is: They’re not the only group that’s been targeted for hate throughout history. The holocaust didn’t even specifically target jews. We don’t get to make a “Transgender state”, or a “Black American state”, and especially not displace others for that. In some ways the world needs to accept that, whether by 10 miles or 100, we’ll still be neighbors on this planet and not totally unreachable. Set that distance, and it means you only get boiling points like 9/11 rather than shots fired in a neighborhood.
a trans state would be dope.
but make sure to differentiate the Jewish community and the zionists/Israel community.
although a lot of Jews support Israel. lots are speaking against it, some of the loudest anti zionists Voices are Jewish, from Chomsky, Finkelstein, JVP, btselem…
no one has the right to an ethnostate
the sad reality is that lots of refugees fleed to Palestine, but instead of being refugees, they wanted to be colonizers.
a trans state would be dope.
Can we just kick everyone out of Wyoming and make Wyoming the trans state?
not sure why Wyoming, but go ahead
Because Wyoming not?
Eh, it’s the least populace US state. Plus, who doesn’t like mountains?
The holocaust didn’t even specifically target jews
🤨🤔
Split semantics on exact wording if you’d like. A better word might be “solely”. The Nazi party collected anyone of a variety of demographics they didn’t like, including foreigners, LGBT, physically/mentally disabled, scholars, etc.
deleted by creator
This an incredibly fucking stupid post. You’re so off base it would be funny if there wasn’t an ongoing genocide happening while you’re here brushing off Isreals warcrimes with a moronic analogy.
Palestinians and Israelis aren’t brothers though. One is indigenous fighting for his land and the other is a settler on an apocalyptic colonizing mission because he claims God gave it to him 2500 years ago.
“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.”
— David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938
This is gross. Israel invaded and occupied Palestine. The people of Gaza were driven there by ethnic cleansing, a wall was built around them, and they have been starved of food, water, and medicine for years before fighting back.
Israel wants to finish cleansing the land of Palestinians. Palestinians want to end the state of Israel and return to their homes. Only one of these requires exterminating the other side.
Nah this is like if you are the parent of an adult child. They have a rough time. They get burned by a series of landlords who screw them over, take advantage of them, and seriously harm their well being. For whatever reason, they decide that instead of renting, their best option is to go squat in their childhood home. It was sold years ago and currently occupied, but they decided they’re just going to force their way in at gunpoint, take over part of the house, and slowly take over more and more of it. You think this is a great idea, and you gladly provide them with weapons and ammo so they can occupy their childhood home.
100%
except there’s a bit of tragedy
Palestinians are in large part the Jews who stayed there and later converted.
so it’s more like your childhood home is housing your brother and his family. you take over it at gunpoint and act like they never existed
Your comment tldr: “You guys don’t get it; they’re both bad”
and then everyone clapped for you. /s
Eat shit.
It’s spooky how accurate this analogy is
It’s not accurate in the slightest.
It’s a genuinely disgusting mischaracterization of violent dispossession and genocide as some kind of sibling rivalry.
This is not an argument between family! Palestinian people are being maimed, tortured, starved, and killed! They have been subjected to relentless oppression, occupation, and brutality under an internationally recognized system of apartheid for decades. The perpetrators of these heinous crimes do not need a stern talking to from a parent, they need to be brought to justice.
What is happening now is the culmination of years of this sort of dismissive patronizing bullshit framing of some of the most despicable things humans can do to others. The genocidal intent motivating these acts is spoken openly and plainly by zionist officials and media, and all foreign backers have made it abundantly clear that they will do their part to try to sanitize and legitimize these horrific crimes.
A reckoning will come, and absolutely no one who sided with israel, in virtually any capacity, will be able to claim ignorance nor innocence. Every one will be remembered for their role in supporting these sadistic genocidal child murderers.
I mean if your only source of information on this conflict Al Jazeera then maybe, but if you actually look through the history of this region you would quickly understand that this is a gross oversimplification that ignores a lot of context.
It ignores all the previous wars, all the tensions during the British mandate, the tensions during the Ottoman Empire, how the modern states came to be, how they developed their identities, the involvement of other countries in the region, the involvement of distant foreign powers, the insane amount of ethnic cleansing carried out not just in both of these states but also in the wider region as a consequence of that events that took place in this region.
The point is that there is a lot that led us to this point, and it’s neither accurate or helpful to boil to replace history with a narrative. We can have an honest discussion about the current situation where we can agree to condemn the atrocities taking place right now, agree that the people responsible should be brought to justice, while also acknowledging the historical reality. From that point of view, I see this analogy as oversimplified, but still accurate tug of war between the two where neither wants to let go of the rope until the other completely loses.
You don’t need Aljazeera to know the truth, just read what Zionist wrote and said themselves. The following is a quote by Jabotinsky:
“[It is the] iron law of every colonizing movement, a law which knows of no exceptions, a law which existed in all times and under all circumstances. If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else – or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempts to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not “difficult”, not “dangerous” but IMPOSSIBLE! … Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important to build, it is important to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot – or else I am through with playing at colonialization.”
As quoted by Lenni Brenner, in The Iron Wall: Zionist Revisionism from Jabotinsky to Shamir (1984), where the quotation is cited as being from “The Iron Law”
There’s more quotes by other Zionists that make no doubt that Israelis are the aggressors and Palestinians are the victims. There’s no two sides to colonialism and ethnic cleansing.
Lenni Brenner (born 1937), formerly known as Leonard Glaser or Lenny Glaser,[a] is an American Trotskyist writer. In the 1960s, Brenner was a prominent civil rights movement activist and vocal opponent of the Vietnam War. Since the 1980s, his activism has focused on anti-Zionism. He has published widely on the history of Zionism, in particular asserting that the movement collaborated with the Nazis.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenni_Brenner
Ze’ev Jabotinsky[a][b] MBE (born Vladimir Yevgenyevich Zhabotinsky;[c] 17 October 1880[1] – 3 August 1940)[4] was a Russian-born[d] author, poet, orator, soldier, and founder of the Revisionist Zionist movement and the Jewish Self-Defense Organization in Odessa.
With Joseph Trumpeldor, he co-founded the Jewish Legion of the British Army in World War I.[10] Later he established several Jewish organizations, including the paramilitary group Betar in Latvia, the youth movement Hatzohar and the militant organization Irgun in Mandatory Palestine.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ze'ev_Jabotinsky#Early_life
Yeah, I don’t care what some activist who has clear biases wrote about some other activist who also has clear biases but in the other direction . We’re talking about isn’t about ideology, but how the actual history unfolded, what events ended up taking place, and how those events lead us to today. My point is that the actual history that took place is beyond of the scope of ideological framing. The reality is more complex then you give it credit.
Would you rather read it from a Zionist? How do you feel about the first Israeli prime minister?
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.
One more by the same person:
“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.” — David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.
And fuck him, all I am saying is that the history that led up today is more complex than you people are making it out to be. From Israel’s foundation until today, there is a lot that happened that wasn’t foreseen by this guy or anybody. It’s like how the US was founded similar principles but ended up being something that’s vastly different from it’s founders imagined, the same goes for other places like Turkey or New Zealand or Brazil or even Palestine. You can’t boil down one of the world’s oldest regions with the richest history during one it’s most turbulent times to a narrative made by western activists who boil down everything to “this side good that side bad lol”, that’s ignorance.
The ridiculous thing is that by acknowledging you have no idea how foundational Jabotinsky was to the genesis of the state of israel, you’ve revealed how little of the history you actually know and understand.
There is a direct line from Jabotinsky and Irgun to Menachem Begin, a former prime minister who was a member of Irgun and who later founded Herut, which eventually transformed into Likud, which is literally the current ruling party of the state with Netanyahu at its helm.
These are not fringe figures, revisionist zionism has been the dominant tendency for decades by this point, though it has intensified and become even more vicious and genocidal as the war on terror gave them ample cover and support for their brutality.
You insist it is complicated but clearly have no idea how uncomplicated it really is. The first zionist congress was in 1897, and the zionist occupation of Palestine began shortly after. Colonization started at a trickle but ramped up during the british mandate period. By the time israel declared independence, it had already been engaging in ethnic cleansing campaigns and massacres for years.
Do you not understand that israelis today very literally live in stolen homes, and are in the process of actively stealing and demolishing homes throughout the entire region? Every week more people have their homes and crops taken or destroyed by settlers, settlers who poison their livestock and take chainsaws to olive groves that have existed for centuries. Settlers who routinely attack and terrorize Palestinians under the watchful eyes of the occupation forces, who will step in to detain or murder Palestinians that resist in any capacity. Settler who have planted millions of european trees over the ruins of Palestinian villages to try to cover their crimes.
It has never not been a settler colonial project in service of creating an ethnostate. It has never not been rooted in violent dispossession and ethnic cleansing. There have been figures and groups that sought to soften the brutality, some early on that even had more of a vision of peaceful coexistance with the indigenous population, but that has never been a real manifestation of the zionist project.
While all history has complexity and nuance, it is not so complicated that we can’t see a very clear and consistent aggressor and occupier, alongside resistance to it which has been routinely portrayed as somehow unjustified. If you really think it’s complicated, I’d wager you’ve literally never even attempted to understand the history from the perspective of Palestinians. If you had, you wouldn’t be saying any of this shit. Do yourself a favor and learn so you stop being a part of the problem.
And I’ll say it again, you’re not speaking history, you’re speaking narrative and ideology. You don’t seem to understand that it doesn’t matter what the founding ideology is, what matters is what actually happened. The fact that you think you can boil this conflict down to “good vs bad” shows that your ignorance on the subject. There are a lot of conflicts in history that could be that simple, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a good example, but this is not one of those conflicts.
History is meant to be something that’s factual, because you’re retelling what happened. You’re not supposed to be taking sides and digest information from the perspective of a side, that defeats the whole purpose of being objective.
I’ll give you an example, during the 20th century, around 1 million Jews in the muslim world were forced out from their countries for no other reason than being Jewish. These people didn’t do anything wrong, they had nothing to do with the creation of Israel but they found themselves stripped of their property, communities (some of which are thousands of years old) and were forced to go there as that was the only place that would accept them. These people are as much victims as the victims of the Nakba, except this was even larger in scale… yet people like you don’t even acknowledge it’s existence.
Here’s another example, before the creation of Israel and Palestine, the British Mandate had a population of around 750k in the 1920s, and around 10% of those were Jewish. Those Jews were very religious, as opposed to many zionist Jews that migrated there. These Jews were vocal against the creation of Israel, but they became citizens anyway when Israel was established. Those Jews also happen to be from sects that have consistently had the highest birthrates over the decades, and so their descendants today can trace their roots back for thousands of years having never left the region. These people clearly don’t fit the narrative you are trying to paint, but again, you don’t acknowledge their existence.
Here’s yet another example, the Palestinian national identity formed around in the 1920s and 1930s, around the same time the Israeli national identity formed, and both became official after the 1947 partition plan. Prior to the British Mandate, there was no such thing as a Palestinian nation. The term “Palestine” was a colloquial one that loosely referred to the region that made up the “holy land”. The borders and identity that we associate with Palestine today didn’t exist during the Ottoman period, these are literally British inventions. The region was divided differently and the people there saw themselves differently. The region was filled with Turks, Jews, Christians, Arabs, and bunch of other ethnic and religious groups. They all saw themselves as natives to the region and they primarily identified with their ethnic/religious group first and then as Ottoman second. The same applies to Mamluks before the Ottoman Empire. In this case, the Arabs in the region saw themselves as a part of al bilad al sham (the Levant or greater Syria) which was a part of al ummah al arrabiya (the Arab nation). This is because until the British and the French drew random borders, the Arab world saw itself as a single nation. When people talk about the native nation of Palestine, they have no idea what they’re talking about.
I could keep going, but you get the idea. Like I said, it doesn’t matter how something was intended to happen, what matters was what actually happened. These are all events things that were not foreseen by Zionist philosophers living in god knows where. This is precisely why you can’t develop narratives based on narratives, what you will end up with is a distorted image of reality. I agree with you that what the Israeli government today is doing in Gaza and the West Bank is reprehensible and I agree with you that Zionist philosophers were pro-colonialism, but what I am saying is that only using these two points of the regions history or using a single perspective (especially a biased one) will blind to everything else that happened.
If you would like something to read, a good and free place to start would be this chapter of israeli historian Avi Shlaim’s book “Genocide in Gaza: Israel’s Long War on Palestine”, which is publicly available right here.
Some relevant excerpts about Jabotinsky specifically:
The Zionist mainstream settled on Palestine as the location of this state because of the territory’s resonance in Jewish history and culture. How large should the state be, what should be its character, how could it be realised – such questions provoked heated controversies within the Zionist movement. But almost the full spectrum of Zionist opinion cohered around the essential goal of establishing a state in Palestine populated by an overwhelming Jewish demographic majority.
This objective almost inevitably provoked conflict in Palestine between Zionist newcomers and the territory’s existing inhabitants, who were overwhelmingly not Jewish. Palestinian Arabs had no political stake in an endeavour that sought, as the leading Zionist diplomat Chaim Weizmann put it, to render Palestine “as Jewish as England is English”. On the contrary, Palestinians reasonably feared that Zionism could succeed only by dispossessing them of house and homeland. Palestinian opposition to Zionism was therefore as comprehensive as it was consistent. This fundamental clash of interests was spotlighted by Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the ever-candid leader of Revisionist Zionism. In his seminal 1923 article, “The Iron Wall”, Jabotinsky argued that Palestinians would never “voluntarily consent to the realisation of Zionism” because “every native population in the world resists colonists”. This meant “Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population” behind “a power that is independent” of them. Zionism for many Jews was a movement for collective assertion as well as defence through national self-determination. Zionism for Palestinians was a violent colonial imposition.
and later
As Jabotinsky prophesied, expanding Jewish settlement frequently provoked Palestinian opposition as well as resistance. Such opposition was typically overruled by means of discriminatory administration while resistance was suppressed by force. In the Mandate period, the Zionist leadership rejected the democratic principle of majority rule in Palestine so long as Jews comprised a minority, on the correct assumption that an Arab electoral majority would vote to end Jewish immigration and settlement. Between 1936 and 1939, British armed forces along with Jewish paramilitaries viciously crushed a Palestinian national revolt. After the 1948 War, Israel subjected some 90 percent of its Arab citizens to military rule. This emergency regime facilitated the destruction of Arab property and expropriation of Arab land until it was lifted in 1966, by which time the state’s demographic objectives within the Green Line had been substantially accomplished. The pattern repeated in the OPT from the following year. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have lived under Israeli military rule since 1967: three-quarters of Israel’s lifespan as a state. The occupation has been enforced through harsh repression including deportation, arbitrary detention, collective punishment, and unlawful killings. By one estimate, Israel jailed more than 800,000 Palestinians from the OPT between 1967 and 2016; those detained were “routinely subjected to torture”.
It ignores all the previous wars, all the tensions during the British mandate, the tensions during the Ottoman Empire, how the modern states came to be, how they developed their identities, the involvement of other countries in the region, the involvement of distant foreign powers, the insane amount of ethnic cleansing carried out not just in both of these states but also in the wider region as a consequence of that events that took place in this region.
And yet, for all your snowjob bullshit, there is one people in chains and another people putting them in chains. I don’t give a shit what the history is. No one has the right to do that to someone else. The Nazis had a long list of historical grievances against their Jewish population. You would have been right there on the side of the Nazis, saying that while you don’t support them necessarily, you fully understand what Hitler is trying to accomplish.
And yet, for all your snowjob bullshit, there is one people in chains and another people putting them in chains. I don’t give a shit what the history is. No one has the right to do that to someone else.
We can condemn the Israeli government’s reprehensible actions without using historical revisionism to drive narratives. Also history matters, how else are we supposed to understand why things are the way they if we don’t even bother understand what led up to them in an objective manner?
The Nazis had a long list of historical grievances against their Jewish population. You would have been right there on the side of the Nazis, saying that while you don’t support them necessarily, you fully understand what Hitler is trying to accomplish.
That’s some colossal bullshit. It’s the other way around. The Nazis were notorious for historical revisionism and crafting propaganda narratives that misrepresented history and boiled down all the complexity and nuance to just “Jews bad”. That’s why they blamed Jews for everything. If the Nazis understood history, then they would’ve known that their decisions would’ve led to their demise. You don’t seem to understand that no cause is noble enough to justify dishonest representations of reality. This applies to both Israel and Palestine.
waiting for bill maher who claimed muslims were inferior because some muslim countries supposedly supported this and that according to random polls. surely he will be consistent.
He will be consistent in saying Muslims are inferior.
Bill Maher is the biggest hypocrite.
Not enough principle to be a hypocrite. He’s just a drunk old creep.
Lebensraum
I can’t trust a poll that claims nearly universal support for a Genocidal government. A phony poll like that would be exactly the kind of propaganda an immoral government would spread.
Here in America, if the MAGA Nazi government claimed 82% supported them, I would literally laugh at it.
Governments like Israel and MAGA can’t be trusted with anything. They are ALWAYS lying.
Well it wasn’t Israel that conducted the survey, it was a group working with the university of Pennsylvania.
