Espanol / English

Middle East Near You

The British liberals who have a problem with Palestinians

Image of newspapers [File photo]
Image of newspapers [File photo]

 

 

On the week of Nakba Day, the cover story of New Statesman, a liberal-left weekly British magazine, has dismissed the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948 as a “tragic consequence of…war.”

Nakba Day, held annually on May 15, commemorates the destruction of Palestinian communities that took place with the establishment of the State of Israel. In 1947-’49, some 400-500 villages were emptied and levelled, and 700-800,000 Palestinians were expelled and denationalised.

This was no ‘accident’. When David Ben-Gurion was asked what to do with Palestinian inhabitants of Lydda and Ramla, he replied: “Expel them.” Returning refugees were shot dead, their land expropriated. This was how a Jewish majority within Israel’s pre-1967 lines was created.

The article compounds its Nakba denial with a disingenuous definition of Zionism: “the belief in the right to a Jewish state is all that the term…means”, the authors claim. Like other recent efforts, this definition intentionally disappears what a ‘Jewish state’ has meant in practice for Palestinians.

New Statesman, whose politics is described by its current editor Jason Cowley as “centre-left liberalism”, has some kind of a problem with Palestinians.

In February, it published an article by Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis lauding “the beauty of Israeli democracy.” Last November, meanwhile, the magazine published a piece by Israeli writer Ari Shavit, where he described “Palestinian youths” who “awake in the morning and decide to kill a Jew.”

New Statesman does not even attempt to appear balanced. Under their ‘Middle East’ section, you have to scroll back through the archives all the way to July 25, 2014 to even find one piece authored by a Palestinian (‘Letter from Gaza’ by Ghada Al Kord).

In the same period, articles on Israeli and Palestinian politics have been published, including by Israelis. Some include criticism of Israeli government policies – but why systematically exclude Palestinians from describing their own situation under colonial occupation?

This is a similar (but worse) pattern to the one I identified last December as prevailing in The Guardian. Out of 138 op-eds on Palestine/Israel published in the paper’s ‘Comment is free’ section from October 2013 to November 2015, just 20 were written by Palestinians.

Since then, The Guardian’s problem has persisted, though the numbers show a slight improvement.

From December 2015 to the present, there have been a further 12 op-eds specifically on Palestine/Israel (I excluded pieces on the ongoing antisemitism row in Britain, unless Palestine/Israel was a main focus of the article). Of these 12 op-eds, four have been by Palestinians.

Yet when you remember that the last six months has seen a sharp escalation in repressive Israeli policies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip – including land confiscation, demolitions, displacement, lethal violence, and mass arrests – then The Guardian’s comment coverage (or lack of it) is troubling.

Then there was last month’s appalling op-ed by senior staff member Jonathan Freedland, ostensibly about left-wing ‘antisemitism’. In fact, the piece was an instructively transparent apologia for Israel’s historic and ongoing policies of ethnic cleansing and institutionalised racism.

Charles H. Manekin, an orthodox Jewish studies and philosophy professor, recently used the term ‘anti-Palestinianism’ to describe the various ways in which both Palestinians’ opposition to the colonisation of their homeland, and international solidarity with their struggle, is delegitimised.

It is a sad state of affairs when, through what – and who – they choose to publish, through both marginalising and maligning Palestinians, Britain’s two most prominent liberal left publications are trying to outdo each other in anti-Palestinianism.

Categories
BlogBlogs - PoliticsEurope & RussiaIsraelMiddle EastOpinionPalestineUK
  • лидия

    There is nothing new. UK colonialist “leftists” were always apologist for UK imperialism. Orwell, for ex, in the end of 1940th called UK “democracy”, while it was a colonial empire, which he had known first-hand being born in a family of a colonial official and then serving as a colonial policeman himself.
    So, to defend Zionist colonialism is a normal job to UK imperialist “left”

    • Mitch

      >Orwell, for ex, in the end of 1940th called UK “democracy”

      He said it was a partial democracy and he was only referring to the uk itself, not its colonies which he was against.

      Orwell was actually very critical of british imperialism and was against it.

  • Mike Abramov

    So, both the Guardian and the New Statesman have had a shift in editorial stance on the plight of the Palestinians according to Ben White. I recall his worry that the BBC did the same about three years ago. What in fact is happening is that even some elements of the Left in politics are realising that the Palestinians are a victim not so much of Israel but of their own leaders, intransigence, lack of recognition of reality and that there is a land for the Jews on their doorstep. The plight of the Palestinians has existed for 70 years. Why? Palestinians are still living in refugee camps. Palestinians are still hanging on to their proverbial key to doors of 1948 homes (the Naqba) and their leaders are still convinced that Israel will revert to Arab rule. If the Jews had that attitude, they would have been wiped out years ago. When anti-Semitism raged in Europe, the Jews moved on sometimes from homes and land they had lived on for hundreds of years. Conclusion. Tell the Palestinians to stop be-moaning their past and move on to the negotiating table.

    • лидия

      Sure, colonized people are always guilty and colonizers, like Zionists, are just good guys.
      Now please tell us how Vietnamese or Algerians or Kenyans were victims of their leaders intransigence, lack of recognition of reality and not of the colonizers.
      Somehow, though, reality had changed and suddenly there is NO land for the colonizers in Algeria, Vietnam or Kenya. Of course, there were Jews in Palestine BEFORE Zionist colonization, they just were NOT colonizers (Zionists). I am sure in free from Zionist colonization Palestine there would be place for Jews – just not colonizing Zionists.
      Also, I am going to grab Mike Abramov’s home and say that my god has promised it to me and some of my armed friends and politician friends would help me. And if Mike Abramov dare to protest, it would be HIS fault – of his intransigence, lack of recognition of reality and that there is a place to me in his home.

      • peepsqueek

    • peepsqueek

      @ Mike, To add:

      From 1949–67, when Jews were forbidden to live on the West Bank, the Arabs refused to make peace with Israel.

      From 1967–77, the Labor Party established only a few strategic settlements in the territories, yet the Arabs were unwilling to negotiate peace with Israel.

      At the 1972 Olympic Games, all the Israeli athletes and their coaches were murdered by Palestinian terrorists in front a shocked world. During the memorial service, the Olympic Flag was flown at half-staff, along with the flags of most of the other competing nations at the request of Willy Brandt. Ten Arab nations objected to their flags being lowered to honor murdered Israelis; their flags were restored to the tops of their flagpoles immediately. All bets were off the table for any kind of peace after that.

      In 1977, months after a Likud government committed to greater settlement activity took power, Egyptian President Sadat went to Jerusalem and later signed a peace treaty with Israel. Incidentally, Israeli settlements existed in the Sinai and those were removed as part of the agreement with Egypt.

      One year later, Israel froze settlement building for three months, hoping the gesture would entice other Arabs to join the Camp David peace process, but none would.

      In 1994, Jordan signed a peace agreement with Israel and settlements were not an issue; if anything, the number of Jews living in the territories was growing.

      Between June 1992 and June 1996, under Labor-led governments, the Jewish population in the territories grew by approximately 50 percent. This rapid growth did not prevent the Palestinians from signing the Oslo accords in September 1993 or the Oslo 2 agreement in September 1995.

      In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to dismantle dozens of settlements, but the Palestinians still would not agree to end the conflict.

      In August 2005, Israel evacuated all of the settlements in the Gaza Strip and four in Northern Samaria, but terror attacks continued within weeks.

      In 2008, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to withdraw from approximately 94 percent of the West Bank, but the deal was rejected.

      In 2010, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu froze settlement construction for 10 months and the Palestinians refused to engage in negotiations until the period was nearly over. After agreeing to talk, they walked out when Netanyahu refused to prolong the freeze.

      • лидия

        1948 is a year of “official” Zionist colonization of the part of the Palestine.
        One more time, it is a Zionist lie that Zionists=Jews. There were and are many anti-Zionist and non-Zionist Jews and many non-Jewish Zionists.
        Zionism is colonialism, no matter who is colonizer -a Jew or a Buddhist.
        BEFORE Zionist colonization Jews had lived in the ME including Palestine. After the end of Zionism Jews sure could live in Palestine but NOT as colonizers.
        Everything else is just hasbara.
        And yeah, it was very nice of Zionist colonizers to ” offer to dismantle dozens of settlements” while keeping on the colonization.
        When I am taking peepsqueek’s home as mine, I am going to offer to let him(?) use the broom closet – if he would be nice enough, and the peepsqueek’s home, of course, would be mine to let or not let peepsqueek to use any part of it.

        • peepsqueek

          Have you seen the map of historic Palestine? Nearly 80% is Jordan, and the United Nations Partition Resolution was for Jews and Arabs to live side by side in peace. Arabs States rejected this and chose war as a remedy multiple times, and they lost.

          From 1948–67, the West Bank and Gaza were under Arab rule, and no Jewish settlements existed there, they were forbidden by law, but the Arabs never set up a Palestinian State. Instead, Gaza was [occupied] by Egypt, and the West Bank was [occupied] by Jordan. No demands for a West Bank/Gaza independent state were heard until Israel, after much Arab terrorism, took control of these areas in the 1967 War.

          • лидия

            UN had NO right to give Palestine to Zionist colonizers. UN had NO problems with colonization and saw Algeria and Vietnam as colonies.
            But somehow(!) now they are NOT colonies anymore. And Rhodesia is not there anymore. The Zionist colony on Palestinian land will join Rhodesia in a dustbin of history.
            Now I know by heart all stale hasbara peepsqueek repeats – I have a very long experience refuting Zionist colonizers lies,
            There was NO Brazil, only Portugal colony so what? Now there is Brazil and not a colony. The Pope himself “gave” Brazil to Portugal colonizers, by the way.
            And it is NOT a matter for peepsqueek when and how Palestinians demand independence from Zionist colonization. Palestinians have demanded it before and is demanding it now, and I support them, and peepsqueek is supporting Zionist colonizers.

          • peepsqueek

            The UN granted a collective people the right of self determination in a small piece of their historic and cultural homeland.

            It was the USA that was mostly responsible for the decolonization of the world. The USA saved Britain and France from Germany at the end of World War II. As a former European colony itself, the USA demanded that the old colonial powers grant independence to their colonies. Within a few decades the independence of India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Arab countries and all of Africa dramatically changed the future of the world. Not only did this drain the flow of wealth from the colonies to Europe, but it was just a matter of time before all these new countries would start competing with their old colonial masters as it should be.

            Then came the USA victory in the Cold War against the Soviet Union. This weakened yet another European colonial power: Russia had consistently expanded its territory and its sphere of influence since getting rid of the Mongols. The year 1991 marked the first time in centuries that its territory shrank. Secondly, the collapse of the communist system in the Soviet Union caused a chain reaction around the world, as all communist systems except three switched to the capitalist system.  These countries became vibrant economies that joined the other developing nations in challenging the supremacy of the old European powers. One of these countries, the People’s Republic of China (the biggest Capitalists in the world), went on to pass all the European powers and become the world’s second largest economy. India will soon pass its old colonial master Britain. The end of the Cold War also prompted the USA to let its own half-colonies in Latin America move towards democracy: the old corrupt and incompetent dictators were kicked out of powers and much better regimes took their places. That meant even more competition for old Europe. 

            The so-called Arab world used to be the second wealthiest region in the world at the end of WWII, when most of those colonial Countries gained independent statehood. Eastern Europe was under communism. Latin America, Africa, India and China were starving to death. Within 50 years of WWII, China and India had become world powers, Latin America was growing rapidly, Eastern Europe had become capitalist and democratic, and even Africa was getting rid of some of its dictators, and a devastated Jewish population built a dynamic nation, whereas the Arab world, with its vast oil and gas wealth, was stuck with the same dictators, and much of the same poverty and illiteracy. Cultural dynamics is the best explanation, but instead, you choose the blame game on your favorite target.

          • лидия

            UN granted Palestine land to Zionist colonizers (who had been colonizing Palestine for more than 50 years and calling it colonization, by the way)
            Of course, back then colonies and colonizers were still not out of fashion.
            If Zionists wanted their own “Arian”,. sorry, “Jewish” state so much, it is their problem that they wanted it in Palestine (before Zionists wanted it in Africa too). Palestinian land was NOT to UN or anyone to grant to colonizers, just as modern day Brazil was not to Pope to do so.
            And, of course, peepsqueek “forgot” that anti-colonial struggle was supported and helped by the USSR and opposed and fought against by “democratic” colonizers, who also backed Zionist colonizers. USA backed aparteid till the end, for ex, and Zionists were the best allies of aparteid, by the way.Now “democratic” colonizers keep on bombing and invading former colonies, while backing such paragons of democracy as Saudi royals (with whom Zionists are also good pals, of course, just as they were with the Shah)
            The worst mistake (worse than a crime) made by Stalin was to back Zionist colonization of Palestine in the beginning.
            And one more time, the hasbara about “civilized” colonizers Zionists is just a lie – they destroyed 400 towns and villages in Palestine to built their colony and still are murdering, torturing, kidnapping, robbing, destroying, ethnic cleansing and even uprooting olives in colonized Palestine.

          • peepsqueek

            Again I have to remind you that Egyptians were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic. Syrians (Assyrians) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic, Moroccans (Berbers) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic, Iraqis were not Arabs not did they speak Arabic, Libya was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic, the Sudan (tribal Africa) was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic, Tunisia was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic. Why are they all called “Arab” Countries, speak Arabic, and belong to the league of “Arab” Nations, and live under some form of Islamic Sharia, which is Arabian?

          • лидия

            all the hasbara by peepsqueek is irrelevant as usual with hasbara
            1) Anglo-Saxes and Normans were not original population of the England, which, by peepsqueek(hasbara) logic means I could demand England to be my colony, right
            2) Palestinians are mostly descendants of ancient population of Palestinian Jews who first converted to Christianity and then to Islam
            3) Zionist colonizers, on the other hand, are mostly descendants of European and about converts to Judaism and have NOTHING to do with Palestine but the faith, but
            4) the founders of Zionist colonization were non-religious at all (Ben Gurion wrote letters in Shabbat, for ex) and religious Jews then saw Zionism as a heresy (and had a lot of reason for it from Judaism POV)
            5) faith does not grant people a right to colonize others’ land – otherwise Philippine’s Catholics would have right to colonize Rome, or Indonesia’s Muslims – to colonize Mecca
            So, the Zionist colonizers are colonizers, Palestine belongs to Palestinians and not to colonizers, and peepsqueek’ s hasbara is very stale, as usual with Zionist colonizers

          • peepsqueek

            Palestine is a geographical, not a specific people. Here are some popular Palestinian Arab surnames, and their meaning in English:
            al-Masri – the Egyptian

            al-Mughrabi – the Moroccan (Mughrabi Quarter is the Moroccan southeast corner of the Old City of Jerusalem)

            al-Djazair – the Algerian

            al-Yamani – the Yemeni

            al-Afghani – the Afghan (meaning Pashtun)

            al-Turki – the Turk

            al-Hindi – the Indian

            al-Hourani – the Hauranite (from southern Syria)

            al-Kurdi – the Kurd

            ‘Al-Filistini’ is a tribal name (nisba) meaning ‘the Palestinian’

            Just a couple of examples:
            Issam Al Yamani is a Palestinian living in Canada alleged by the Canadian government to have ties with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

            Amin al-Hindi (1940 – August 17, 2010) was an intelligence chief of the Palestinian Authority. Al-Hindi was a leader of the Black September movement.

            Amro Al-Hourani, was head of the Palestinian Mission to Denmark

          • лидия

            Palestinians are people of Palestine, like Vietnamese are people of Vietnam. By the way, colonizers in SA as well tried to justify their colonization claiming that there was no such thing as SA non-colonizers. Nice try, but not helping Zionist colonizers to whitewash their colonization

          • peepsqueek

            “Palestinians are people of Palestine” as are Jews, Copts, Assyrians, Armenians, Kurds, etc. Why do they not all have an independent state of their own?

          • лидия

            NON-colonizing Jews sure are Palestinians. There were such Jews before Zionist colonization and there are now and there would be after the end of Zionist colonization. Neturei Karta Jews of Palestine are anti-Zionists and they are Palestinian Jews all right.
            Anyway, it is Palestinians and NOT Zionist colonizers who should decide the future of free Palestine.

          • peepsqueek

            It is important to note that the first enduring Jewish agricultural settlement in the Modern Palestine was founded not by European refugees, but by a group of old-time families, leaving the overcrowded Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. According to the Turkish census of 1875, by that time Jews already constituted a majority of the population of Jerusalem and by 1905 comprised two-thirds of its citizens. The {Encyclopedaedia Britanica] of 1910 gives the population figure as 60,000, of who 40,000 were Jews.

            In 1878 they found the village of Petah Tikva in the Sharon Palin, a village that was to become known as the “Mother of Jewish Settlements” in Palestine. Four years later a group of pioneer immigrants from Russia settled in Rishon le-Zion. Other villages followed in rapid succession.

            Most of the Jewish land purchases involved large tracts belonging to absentee owners. Virtual of the the Jerzeel Valley, for example, belonged to only two people in 1897, the eastern portion to the Turkish Sultan, and the Western part to a rich banker in Syria, Sursuk the Greek. Most of the land had not be cultivated previously and considered uncultivable, This is supported by the Peel Commission Report. Keep in mind that all sales of land under the Ottoman Empire had to be approved by Islamic Courts.

          • лидия

            Even if some of this is true that is NOT changing the fact. No matter what did the Jews who was NOT colonizers, the Zionists were and are colonizers.
            And yes. SA colonizers too claimed that the Blacks were NOT the natives of the land. Really, hasbara is very stale.

          • peepsqueek

            You can couch it anyway you like, but the tiny Country of Israel exists and has diplomatic relations with approximate 150 Countries.

          • лидия

            So did SA under aparteid – till it was no more, LOL
            And there is BDS against Zionist aparteid state now too.

          • peepsqueek

            How many Islamic Countries are you boycotting today for hunan rights violations, for crimes against humanity, and institutional apartheid, religious apartheid, sectarian apartheid, and gender apartheid? Please be specific.

          • лидия

            Ha, peepsqueek is one more time tries to talk about Islam, while there are NO Islam colonizers (even though there are Wahhabi royals and Sisi dictator and so on very dear to USA and Zionists)
            Aparteid SA was boycotted NOT because it was “Christian” or what not but because it was an aparteid settler colony – just like the Zionist colony

          • peepsqueek

            You might ask- Should Arabs be entitled to keep Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Sudan, Libya, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, as Arab Countries, all belonging to the League of “Arab” Nations.

          • лидия

            peepsqueek should ask why USA should keep lands it had robbed from Natives and others. USA was founded as a colony, of course.
            And Zionists are still colonizers and their state is a settler colony, and it will end as every other colony, and peepsqueek could not spin this out.

          • peepsqueek

            Because the evolution of mankind has had larger or more powerful groups to take all tribal lands all over the world to form Countries. Europeans came to the so-called new world and did just that. I am part Native American and I am the result of the injustice, as are most people of the US of mixed race, mixed cultural heritage, and mixed religious philosophies as am I, as is our President, the son of an East African tribesman, the first President in over 50 years to win the popular US vote by over 51% twice.

          • лидия

            Ha-ha, now we have peepsqueek defending the idea of “master race” and so on. What else is his defense of colonialism?
            Never mind, the evolution of mankind (with the help of the USSR) had put the end to colonialism, and Zionist colonialism is going to the end too.

          • peepsqueek

            That was Hitler who wrote the Superior Race Doctrine.

          • лидия

            No, Hitler took it from UK and France colonizer “scientists” and used it. USA, of course, used racism too, being colonizers, and officially finally abolished it, as I have posted, only in 2000!
            Of course, Zionists, been colonizers, are racists too. They use the “chosen people” rubbish to justify their colonization of Palestine.

          • peepsqueek

            Stop the BS- Jewish, Christian, and Islamic text all say that Jews were chosen to receive the Ten Commandments from God and He lead them to the promised land. I am an atheist, but if they all believe it, what is your beef?

            The Qur’an recognizes the Land of Israel (which includes the West Bank) as the [heritage] of the Jews/Israelites and it explains that, before the Last Judgment, Jews/Israelites [will return] to dwell there.
 Fantasy or fiction, this prophecy has come true in your lifetime. What is your beef?

          • Mitch

            >Ha-ha, now we have peepsqueek defending the idea of “master race” and so on.

            He isnt though.

            >Never mind, the evolution of mankind (with the help of the USSR) had put the end to colonialism

            The ussr was also a colonist power, one which unlike south africa did actually end, it also clearly didnt put an end to colonialism as we see it going on to this day.

          • Mitch

            > NO Islam colonizers

            Not to excuse jewish colonisation but you do recognise that muslims did indeed have colonies and expanded, like others, through imperialism?

          • Cecilia73

            Israelis are subject to civil law. Palestinians are subject to military law and have been since the occupation. Even children are tried by military courts. Do you think this is normal?

          • peepsqueek

            There would be no occupation if collective Arabs States had accepted one tiny Jewish State in the Middle East, and Palestinian Arabs would be celebrating 68 years of independent statehood today, with pre 1967 lines. Arabs have used, after subsequent defeats– the doctrine of the limited-liability war. Under this theory, an aggressor may reject a compromise settlement and gamble on war to win everything in the comfortable knowledge that, even if he fails, he may insist on reinstating the status quo in the original boundaries.

          • peepsqueek

            If you believe Israel to be a true apartheid state, please tell us all: Which Israeli hospitals refuse to admit Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli restaurants refuse to serve Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli universities refuse to admit Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli buses refuse to board Israeli Arabs? In what elections are Israeli Arabs not allowed to vote? In what area of public life are Arab women not allowed to serve?

          • лидия

            Hmm. one of the news not long ago was about Zionist hospitals putting Jewish and non-Jewish women giving birth apart (aparteid)
            But never mind, Zionist colonizers do not even let Palestinians in the WB to drive by the same roads as Zionist colonizers, and this, as some anti-aparteid activists said, is even more than was in apartied SA.
            Aparteid means different laws for the people on the same land based of the colonizers’ rule. There are tens of laws discriminating against Palestinian citizens(!) of Zionist colony, never mind the Palestine occupied in 1967. There is a list regarding citizens
            http://www.adalah.org/en/law/index

          • Mitch

            >So did SA under aparteid – till it was no more, LOL

            South Africa still exists. Its also spelt as apartheid.

          • лидия

            my web stalker could not read?
            Never mind, he(?) still has not got that I am NOT talking to Zionists like him.

          • Mitch

            Im actually not a zionist, so feel free to express yourself. I can also read perfectly fine, you claim that israel will one day cease to exist like sa, but sa still exists.

            I guess you could imply that sa in its apartheid condition has ceased, but if israels alters its ways also it too would be in the same position of obviously existing.

          • peepsqueek

            Collective Arab Countries chose war over building a nation? Palestinian Arabs have now applied for statehood, via the same path they have rejected for Israel all of theses years. Had they accepted one tiny Jewish State in the Middle East, Palestinian Arabs would be celebrating 68 years of independent statehood today, with pre 1967 lines. Today, 1.5 million Arabs are living in Israel proper as citizens on the same land that hypocritical activists say was ethnically cleansed.

          • Cecilia73

            “their historic and cultural homeland”.
            Of millions of blond, blue eyed Russians, Europeans and Americans?
            If that’s the case then as a Catholic I’m entitled to live in the Vatican. And modern Romans are entitled to emigrate to Britain, with incentives of course, given that it is well documented that they lived there less than two thousand years ago (i.e. more recently than the Jews in Palestine).

          • peepsqueek

            Jews are not a specific race, they are a collective people, with one tiny Jewish State. There are 57 declared Muslim States at the UN, all members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the largest voting bloc at the UN General Assembly.

            To add: Egyptians were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic. Syrians (Assyrians) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic, Moroccans (Berbers) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic, Iraqis were not Arabs not did they speak Arabic, Libya was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic, the Sudan (tribal Africa) was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic, Tunisia was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic. Why are they all called Arab Countries, speak Arabic, and belong to the league of “Arab” Nations, and live under some form of Islamic Sharia, which is Arabian?

      • Raimo Kangasniemi

        Israel’s “offer of peace” for Palestinians was in 1956 part of Egypt’s Sinai. Then and ever since Israel’s idea of “peace” with Palestinians has been some bantustan or group of bantustans under eternal Israeli control.

        PLO’s stand has been the same since 1970s: Only thing Israel needs to get permanent peace is to hand back 22 % of Palestine and give a modicum of justice for the refugees. Israel has said “no” for forty years to that offer.

        • peepsqueek

          And how do you lose every war against Israel and then ask to go back to the status quo of 67 borders. Why did they attack Israel all those years when they already had the pre-67 lines and there were no Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza??????? What do you think the collective Arab armies would have done with the Jews if they had won any of the wars against the tiny Jewish State?

          As for Egypt– Coptic News: 
”Since Christianity came to Egypt in 57 A.D., we, the Christians of Egypt, have not had conflict with the Jewish people. Copts have been a marginal population held in captivity for sixteen centuries. We constitute the largest non-Arab, non-Moslem minority in the Middle East. The Church of Alexandria, is one of the oldest organizations in the Middle East. Despite this distinguished history, it is a church that has been under siege since the Islamic invasion.” [Nearly 100 Christian churches were attacked in Egypt after the coup]

          Bahai institutions and community activities have been illegal under Egyptian law since 1960. All Bahai community properties, including Bahai centers, libraries, and cemeteries, have been confiscated by the government and fatwas have been issued charging Bahai’s with apostasy.

          • лидия

            peepsqueek brags about Zionist colonizers winning wars against Palestinians. Guess what? All colonizers had won in their colonial wars. Now. where are all their colonies?
            And NO, Zionists are NOT “minority” in the ME, they are COLONIZERS. AS such, they have NO place in the ME. Before Zionism Jews lived in the ME and they sure would after the end of Zionist colonization.

          • peepsqueek

            To answer what you have implied- the Jews would live in the Middle East in a lower status, and be subject to Islamists, Islamic Sharia, Political Islam, and a host of Muslim dictators and totalitarian governments, just the way you like it, with no room for the human right of self determination of any other religious or ethnic minorities. You did not say this, but you have to know routine in the rest of the Middle East.

          • лидия

            I have said that Jews would NOT be colonizers. It is not for nothing that to peepsqueek it means a “lower status”. Sorry, but colonizers’ time is over. If former colonizers do not want to live in the ME not as masters, they could return to USA, Russia and so on – and there they would not be “masters” too.

          • peepsqueek

            You make a good argument why Jews should have a tiny Country of their own, so that they can be masters of their own destiny, fate, future, etc. It is obvious that you want the banner of Islam to fly over 100% of the Middle East land mass. At least have the courage to be honest about it.

          • лидия

            peepsqueek made a good argument that I should take his home so I could be the master of my own destiny. I also could use peepsqueek as my dog (at least temporally) and brag how great I am being so nice to peepsqueek, even though his home is really mine
            peepsqueek is also, as hasbarists are, not very bright. I have never mentioned Islam at all, I spoke ONLY of Palestinians, who could be of any faith or atheists. I am a Jew and an atheist, by the way.

          • peepsqueek

            Nice try! You are starting to have delusions of relevance.

            “I have never mentioned Islam at all” ? An independent Palestinian State will define itself as both an Arab and a Muslim State, and they want the ancient City of Jerusalem to be a 23rd Arab State and a 58th Muslim State at the United Nations.

          • лидия

            Oh, one more Zionist shrink at the same page and in the same time.
            Are they all just using the same handbook – we all know that Zionists have published a lot of tips for hasbarists, but when they are not working, hasbarists turn to calling names and character attack – as if we are discussing my character and not a matter of Zionist colonization.
            So the score for the comments to this article
            Zionists defenders of Zionist colonialism –2
            Zionists attacking my personality ———–2
            As usual, of course

          • peepsqueek

            If you had any contradictory evidence, you would have posted.

          • лидия

            I have posted evidence that Zionists are colonizers. It is a fact and is enough to made peepsqueek to call me names and other great “arguments” like that I am an Islamist or what not.

          • peepsqueek

            The banner of Islam flies over 99.9% of the Middle East land mass, and if you had your way it would fly over 100%. Denying it does not change anything, as Israel is the only ethnic and religious minority that has the right of self determination in the Middle East.

          • лидия

            One more time the Zionist whitewasher of Zionist colonization peepsqueek tells irrelevant rubbish. There is NO problem of Islam or other faith, sure no to me – an Atheist, sure not to Palestinians – be they Muslim, Christian, Druze or Atheists as me.
            The matter is Zionist COLONIZATION. Period.
            By the way, the banner of peepsqueek flies over 99,9% of his home, and I have a right to take at least a half for myself, have I not? Because I am the only ethnic and religious minority that has the right of self determination in the peepsqueek’s home!!!!!!!
            LOL
            I see that peepsqueek started to repeat his hasbara points, so I am repeating my refutation of them. But I suppose it is enough. I have said enough to readers to see who is right and who is colonizers’ defender, so I suppose I could leave now.
            peepsqueek could then repeat his(?) “arguments” about banner of Islam and my character and what not. I rest my case, because I doubt peepsqueek could post something “new” (that is, still not used by him(?) here and thus not refuted by me hasbara points)

          • peepsqueek

            “By the way, the banner of peepsqueek flies over 99.9% of his home” I am glad that you mentioned that, because I live in an apartment building that was purchased by a man from the Middle East, and even though I have lived in the US all of my life, and every male member of my family has served in the military, and I have paid American taxes all of my life, and I am a combat veteran with wounds to show for it, the owner of my apartment building now decides who comes and who has to go.

          • лидия

            So, the peepsqueek is living in USA, his family is a family of imperialist war criminals and he(?) defends Zionist colonizers because peepsqueek is feeling a kindred spirit in colonizers – war criminals, robbers, rapists, torturers and lairs.
            How many foreign states peepsqueek relatives invaded, bombed, ruined and made ready for USA imperialism to rape? As S.Butler said
            “I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

          • peepsqueek

            For the benefit of the readers, I repeat: It was the USA that was mostly responsible for the decolonization of the world. The USA saved Britain and France from Germany at the end of World War II. As a former European colony itself, the USA demanded that the old colonial powers grant independence to their colonies. Within a few decades the independence of India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Arab countries and all of Africa dramatically changed the future of the world. Not only did this drain the flow of wealth from the colonies to Europe, but it was just a matter of time before all these new countries would start competing with their old colonial masters as it should be.

            Then came the USA victory in the Cold War against the Soviet Union. This weakened yet another European colonial power: Russia had consistently expanded its territory and its sphere of influence since getting rid of the Mongols. The year 1991 marked the first time in centuries that its territory shrank. Secondly, the collapse of the communist system in the Soviet Union caused a chain reaction around the world, as all communist systems except three switched to the capitalist system. These countries became vibrant economies that joined the other developing nations in challenging the supremacy of the old European powers. One of these countries, the People’s Republic of China (the biggest Capitalists in the world), went on to pass all the European powers and become the world’s second largest economy. India will soon pass its old colonial master Britain. The end of the Cold War also prompted the USA to let its own half-colonies in Latin America move towards democracy: the old corrupt and incompetent dictators were kicked out of powers and much better regimes took their places. That meant even more competition for old Europe.

          • лидия

            Readers sure would believe the Zionist colonizers’ whitewasher peepsqueek. They just need to forget about USA role in Cuba, Philippines, Vietnam and so on. And the big love between USA and aparteid too, of course. And the murder of Lumumba.
            And such trifles as the plight of Natives in USA, and that in USA the last law against “miscegenation” was abolished only when Alabama did so in 2000 after failing to do so in several earlier referendums on the matter. At the time, nearly 526,000 people voted against the repeal.
            Sure, USA was and is the best “liberator” of non-whites. Just ask Iraqis, for ex, 93% of young Iraqis see USA as enemy. Maybe they should read peepsqueek who also boasted his(?) family being a cannon fodder for USA imperialism, and they will change their opinion.

          • peepsqueek

            What is your cultural history so that the readers can examine your history for your moral high ground? I am sure that you will dodge the question, like you do all other questions.

            As for Iraq, October 13, 1932, Iraq became a sovereign state, and it was admitted to the League of Nations. The declaration of statehood and fixed boundaries triggered age old competition for power in the new entity. Sunnis and Shias, cities and tribes, sheiks and tribesmen, Assyrians and Kurds, pan-Arabists and Iraqi nationalists–all fought for places in the emerging state structure. Unable to establish deep roots, after the Ottomans, the system was overwhelmed by these conflicting sectarian demands. What has changed in all these years?

          • лидия

            What does it matter “my history”? I am not asking for peepsqueek’s one, he(?) volunteered with his(?) family story of imperialist cannon fodder.
            My facts are sound, and I am against aparteid Zionist colony and imperilaism, while peepsqueek defends Zionist colonization with hasbara and USA imperialism with imperialist propaganda. It is enough to readers to decide.
            Of course, if somebody else, not this Zionist, would ask, I could tell.

          • peepsqueek

            Your history is important if you are going claim the moral high ground.

          • лидия

            peepsqueek (who still could not get that I am NOT speaking to him(?), just refuting his(?) hasbara) one more time tells rubbish.
            I claim NO such stupid thing as “the moral high ground”, I never had and not going to start now. I just call spade a spade, Zionist colonization a Zionist colonization and back it with facts.
            The same is about USA being a colonizer and a supporter of colonizers and an imperialist rapist of the world.

          • peepsqueek

            You are having delusions of relevance again. And yes your cultural heritage is important if you are going to point the finger at others for their morality.

          • лидия

            peepsqueek one more time has no “arguments” but the attacks on my personality. Yawn.
            I would not give a damn about peepsqueek’s “morality”, I care only about the facts – Zionism is the colonization of Palestine, and if peepsqueek defends it, one could sees peepsqueek’s morality for oneself.

          • peepsqueek

            I did not attack you, I am clearly describing your opinions. You will say anything to deflect from your real ambition is in this matter.

          • лидия

            I am really bored of peepsqueek explaining to me my “real ambition” and what not, somehow related to Islam banner and other figments of his imagination.
            I have had enough. I have written enough to refute all peepsqueek’s Zionist hasbara and defense of colonialism and imperialism.
            I am leaving and my only “real ambition” is to remind one more time that Zionism is the colonization of Palestine

          • peepsqueek

            You cannot even be honest in parting? Jordan is almost 80% of historic Palestine and Jews and Arabs were to divide up what was left, as the question of Statehood was resolved in 1947 U.N. Partition Resolution (a Jewish State and an Arab State living side by side in peace). The Arabs States rejected any Jewish State in the Middle East.

          • Mitch

            >who still could not get that I am NOT speaking to him

            You should address the person, speaking over someone or about them others where they can see or hear it is really something a teenager would do, it really isnt apt.

          • Mitch

            I believe she is russian, born in the soviet union.

          • Mitch

            >But I suppose it is enough. I have said enough to readers to see who is right and who is colonizers’ defender, so I suppose I could leave now.

            He seems to have put forth the better argument so far, you seem to have been misunderstanding quite a bit and getting basic facts wrong such as believing that south africa is no more or that zionists are not a minority when they clearly are.

          • Cecilia73

            Using the crystal ball again?

          • peepsqueek

            They have already acknowledged this!

          • Mitch

            >it means a “lower status”

            In the sense that they were regarded as second class citizens in arab lands prior to israel or even zionism.

          • Cecilia73

            “the Jews would live….” Of course you have to use the conditional, you don’t have a crystal ball that tells you what might have been. Historically, Jews, Muslims and Christians have lived side by side peacefully in Spain (before the Catholic King kicked out the Muslims) and throughout the Middle East until the arrival of Zionism.

            Instead it is a fact, not conjecture, that the Jews have subjected the native population in Palestine to a lower status and given privilege to Jews over Palestinians. How many Palestinians get permission to build a house? Zero. Yet someone arriving from Brooklyn can build a house (with government incentives naturally) in a few days.
            You sound like you have had one or two of the free trips to Israel for indoctination.

          • peepsqueek

            You sound like the banner of Islam must fly over every inch of the Middle East land mass. Why should Jews, Christians and others be subject to Islamists, Islamic Sharia, Political Islam, and a host of Muslim dictators and totalitarian governments, with no room for the human right of self determination of any other religious or ethnic minorities? Please respond

          • Mitch

            >And NO, Zionists are NOT “minority” in the ME

            So your saying that the majority of people in the middle east are zionists, this is clearly wrong.

      • Cecilia73

        Seems like the Israelis are using the settlements as a negotiating tool. Wrong. They are illegal under international law and should not be used as pawns in a game. They must be dismantled unconditionally.
        You come into my home, evict my family, arrest my husband and sons, bulldoze my home and olive trees, and it is I who must make concessions?

        • peepsqueek

          In the UN Resolution “242”, it does not say Israel must withdraw from “all the” territories occupied after the Six-Day war. This was deliberate, so that the Arab States could not use these territories to attack Israel again. The “Arab States” pushed for the word “all” to be included, but this was rejected by the UN Security Council. Read the UN notes and additions.

          In 1948, Jordan illegally occupied Jerusalem and ethnically cleansed the Old City of every last Jew. Jewish people have always lived in Judea and Samaria—the West Bank—since ancient times. The only time Jewish people have been prohibited from living in the territories in recent decades was during Jordan’s rule from 1948 to 1967, under illegal occupation. Do you want to go back to the good old days?

      • Terry Kelly

        None of this changes the facts on the ground. The facts on the ground are that the State of Israel is a war criminal state, an Apartheid state, a state which is carrying out genocide. We can see for ourselves the way Israel treats Palestinians, it is no different from other murderous regimes anywhere in the world past and present.

        • peepsqueek

          If you believe Israel to be a true apartheid state, please tell us all: Which Israeli hospitals refuse to admit Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli restaurants refuse to serve Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli universities refuse to admit Israeli Arabs? Which Israeli buses refuse to board Israeli Arabs? In what elections are Israeli Arabs not allowed to vote? In what area of public life are Arab women not allowed to serve?

          How many Islamic Countries are you boycotting today for hunan rights violations, for crimes against humanity, and institutional apartheid, religious apartheid, sectarian apartheid, and gender apartheid? Please do not dodge the question.

          And last, the UN Rules of War– Anyone who [specifically] targets non-combatants and civilian populations are no longer subject to protection under these Rules- In other words, all bets are off the table. Read the UN notes and additions on this subject.

    • Raimo Kangasniemi

      Zionist hogwash. Let’s write “The suffering of Jews has been the fault of their leaders.”

      People like you would go ballistic, shout “antisemitism” and declare that the victim must never be blamed.

      Yet, when it comes to Palestinians, you have no such scruples. You blame the victims.

      • peepsqueek

        Arabs have had choices, and if you were referring to the Jews of WWII Europe being the fault of their leaders, the Jews were not given any viable choices, like the Assyrian genocide, and the Armenian genocide, In 1915. The 11 million Germans that died in WWII was definitely the fault of their leaders. There is no moral equivalence.

        The Japanese Emperor had already murdered 5 million civilians in the Japanese theatre before the US entered the War. The Japanese hardship that was to follow was definitely the fault of their leadership. Your moral equivalence argument makes no sense.

        Assyrian International News Agency (AINA):
”Keep in mind that these Christian minorities, the Assyrians, Armenians, Copts, are actually the original inhabitants of these areas with roots going back thousands of years before Christianity. What we’re seeing is a systematic attempt to cleanse the Middle East of its original inhabitants, this is a continuation of the genocide that took place in Ottoman Turkey in 1915.”

    • Terry Kelly

      “When anti-Semitism raged in Europe, the Jews moved on sometimes from homes and land they had lived on for hundreds of years. Conclusion. Tell the Palestinians to stop be-moaning their past and move on to the negotiating table”.

      You are justifying what is being done to the Palestinians by referring to what happened to the Jews in Europe. That’s an obvious case of two wrongs making a right, it was not the Palestinians who committed those atrocities against the European Jews but they are being punished for it. Warped reasoning and completely shameful.

      • лидия

        Zionists know no shame, because they are colonizers. Colonizer could not be shamed by the suffering of colonized people, or s/he would stop being a colonizer.

  • Raimo Kangasniemi

    Labour’s Tom Watson just called Israel’s establishment “a modern miracle”.

    It’s clear what problem the British liberals have with Palestinians: They stand between them and what they want to practice – uncontrolled adulation of the holy and most sacred Israel…

    • nibs

      And Sadiq Khan, like Anne Hidalgo, the mayor of Paris, will soon hold a Tel Aviv festival in London to celebrate that wonderful colonizing occuppying “democracy”.
      Who visited him, what were the inducements and/or the threats ?

  • danehrlich

    The reality everyone seems to have trouble with Palestinians, but its more liberal to scapegoat Israel. Israel has been forged into a highly productive and powerful little nation….any nation with nukes and a delivery system has to be taken seriously. Now Israel has been given observer status at NATO.

    Yet, the Palestinians continue to follow their corrupt leaders from one disaster after another. Now its Nabka time again and Israeli Arabs staged their protest celebration in the Negev. This is another example of the Arab stupidity gene, which genetically separates them from Jews, who always know a good deal when they see it…

    Israeli Arabs should thank Allah for not living in Gaza or in all the other war torn chaotic Arab nations. But no, they still haven’t come to grips with the fact the Nabka was of their own making, or at least the making of the invading Arab armies. Israel implored the Palestinians to live in peace and help the Jews build the state. The backed war instead…their Nabka…the disaster for losers.

    • лидия

      The reality is that all imperialists back their fellow colonizers – Zionists. And yes, danehrlich could tell us how great were Brits and French and Dutch and other colonizers. And how great was SA under aparteid too.
      By the way, Hitler was a pupil of UK in colonialism, he openly stated that Russia would be “German’s India” – ie colony. I guess danehrlich could explain how great Nazi Germany would manage the lands of not-civilized Slavs.
      Now, unfortunately for danehrlich and other lovers oi Zionist colonization of Palestine, the age of colonization is over. Zionist colony is the last and would not last for very long time. Get used to this simple fact, all lovers of colonization.
      By the way, danehrlich sounds truly obscene when he(?) praised Zionist colonizers for their treatment of some Palestinians under their rule (because Zionist colonizers now rule ALL of Palestine, and Gaza is but a giant ghetto). Of course, during the slavery in the great democratic USA there were more and less fortunate slaves – and I am sure danehrlich would said how happy must be home slaves compared to the plantation’s ones.

  • Quo Vadis

    How the State of Israel came about:
    http://bit.ly/1Nu9NdN

  • Mike Abramov

    My dear friend. Stolen is historically incorrect. You do not know your history of the Middle East. Zionists (Jews) did buy many hectares of land from the Arabs in the 1920s. This land was swamp. desert and unused land. I time the Zionists turned the land in to farming and residential land. Then the Arabs got angry and refused to work with the Zionists. Read: The Three Faiths by Philip Graves.

  • kim

    Israel was founded by force and deception on the biggest zionist lie, “Land without people”, “Palestine”, for “People without a land” the “Zionists”. Today there are over twelve million Palestinians. The other wrong assumption by the zionist leaders, is, ” the old will die, the young will forget”. Nothing could be further from truth, each succeeding Palestinian generation is more committed to return to Palestine, than the preceding one. No matter how many battles the Palestinians lose,in the end, no matter how long it takes, they are destined to win their right to return.