Palestine Israel History and Theirstory
HisStory and TheirStory.
I hope that the reader will bear over with me for inventing the word theirstory, but if history is written by those who are victorious and powerful enough to position themselves and their narratives about historical events into acceptance by mainstream historians and media, then, what else should one call the narratives of those who have suffered defeat.
Palestinians have suffered from being in the position of the defeated ones for decades. Their history is theirstory, the one that does not make it into the textbooks of history. When dealing with human beings and their emotional as well as intellectual frailties however, the fact that those who write history are the ones who have been victorious, and those who write theirstory are those who have suffered defeat, does neither validate history nor theirstory. Both usually are “a story”, a narrative about a discourse, as seen from a particular perspective.
The language of political discourse is generally speaking, and by virtue of the nature of politics, dominated by attempts to position one self and others. From perceived positions derive perceived rights and privileges as well as perceived duties and obligations. Scapegoating is but one of the many tactics that are applied in the political game of positioning oneself and one’s interests in the most favorable manner, while positioning one’s adversary much less favorably.
Spin Doctors or Propaganda Experts are playing a crucial role; so do lobbies, economy, geopolitical considerations and a cohort of other factors one can easily identify. Sadly, the abuse of the language of the political discourse has contributed considerably to prolonging the dispute between Palestine and Israel.
Decades of conflict, and unimaginable human suffering of both Palestinian and Israeli individuals, families, communities would not have been possible had there been a worldwide demand to bring an end to the suffering; That is, if only it would have been presented in a factual manner; That is, if media and the entertainment industry would not have been playing a crucial role in dehumanizing one side while omitting the crimes of the other.
A very well researched and documented movie produced by The Media Education Foundation, REAL BAD ARABS, demonstrates how badly Hollywood has contributed to positioning the Arab people as uncivilized, brutal villains, terrorists, and right out inhumane, or sub-human (1).
In the movie REAL BAD ARABS, featuring Dr. Jack Shaheen, Dr. Shaheen documents that Arabs are being positioned as the most malign group in the history of Hollywood. Rightfully, Dr. Shaheen is drawing the comparison between the way in which Hollywood has been and is positioning Arabs as sub-human with that of the German National Socialists positioning of Jews as Untermenschen.(ibid.)
In both cases, in that of the positioning of Jews and the inhuman suffering that has been inflicted on European Jews during the National Socialist Era in Germany, and the ongoing positioning of Arabs as sub-human, and the suffering of Palestinians, the effect of the positioning is a significant increase in general populations’ accept of politically motivated violence as a legitimate means to solve political conflicts.
This also influences politicians who grew up with the stereotyping media and entertainment, politicians who also have been conditioned by propaganda since their childhood.
In his book “REAL BAD ARABS, How Hollywood Vilifies a People “ (2), Dr. Jack G. Shaheen looked at more than one thousand movies, from the oldest archives of Hollywood movies to the greatest “Blockbuster” movies up to 2001.
Shaheen elicits the stereotypes that rob a whole people of their humanity. One could say that Dr. Shaheen is demonstrating on Hollywood productions that, what the renown Palestinian scholar Edward W. Said has described as “Orientalism” (3).
While Said analyzed the stereotyping of all people of Asia Minor to East and South East Asia, Shaheen particularly analyzes the position Hollywood reserves for Arabs.
In the movie “REAL BAD ARABS“, Dr. Jack Shaheen points at the the Disney Classic “Aladdin” as a representative . The movie has been and is being seen by millions of people world-wide; and it is recycling all the old stereotypes. The song at the beginning of the movie is setting the stage:
“Where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face, it’s barbaric, but hey…, it’s home.”
People worldwide, and particularly children, are coached into believing that Arabland is a place where innocent women have their hands amputated for forgetting to pay at the bazaar. In other movies Arab men are described as imbecilic super-rich, as sex addicted tyrants who mistreat their woman, and most importantly, Caucasian – American women. Women are kidnapped and sold off to sleazy Arabs at auctions. Dr. Shaheen elicits that over three hundred movies, nearly 25 % of all Hollywood movies in one way or the other demean Arabs. (Ibid.)
With respect to demeaning an entire people, the same could be said about the countless movies produced during and subsequent to World War Two. Movies that depict the entire German people as beasts, inhumane monsters, and genocidal maniacs.
Countless Hollywood productions show and exaggerate the legitimate suffering of the Jewish people during world war two. As far as I am aware of, there has not ever been a Hollywood production that dramatized the suffering of the at least 125.000 Germans that were burned to death during the bombing and total destruction of Dresden (4), or the at least 17.600 Germans that were burned to death after a 20 minutes bombing raid over Pforzheim (5).
This author has lost almost all of his family during the bombing of Dresden and grew up without ever having a grandfather or grandmother, a great-grandfather or great-grandmother, uncles, or aunts from his father’s side of the family.
Is that suffering not legitimate? Is the suffering of those who perished in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and that of those that were left behind not legitimate human suffering. The fact is, that human beings are kind-hearted by nature, and we do not wish to inflict pain and suffering on our fellow human beings as long as those fellow human beings are granted their dignity as human beings, and they are not systematically being dehumanized and stripped of all human value.
Dr. Jack G. Shaheen elicits in both the movie and the book “REAL BAD ARABS“, that Hollywood and politics go hand in hand in dehumanizing Arabs. He documents that the dehumanization of Arabs began subsequent to World War Two. The Palestinian Israeli conflict, in which the USA unequivocally supported Israel, the Arab Oil Embargo in the seventies, and the revolution in Iran have been the main driving and motivating factors behind the dehumanization in Hollywood productions. (Ibid)
Ever since the founding of the state of Israel every single US-Administration has unequivocally declared that it is committed to what is often called “The American Israeli Friendship”, or by other euphemisms for the unwavering support of Israel, no matter what, and no matter what violations of international law it commits.
Although the USSR also voted in favor of the recognition of Israel, the USSR on the other hand, was known for it’s support of the Palestinian course, more or less regardless what violations of international law there were being committed by some the militant member organizations of the PLO.
In todays Russia, this support is more critical, but it is mainly driven by geopolitical rather than human rights considerations. Russia is just less outspoken about its support of Israel. The people of Israel and Palestine, Arabs, Christians and Jews alike have been, and are still the pawns in superpowers geopolitical stratagems.
Policies impact consensus reality by means of media and the entertainment industry. Consensus reality determines if a people is perceived as human beings, with all the legal, ethical, and moral consequences it implies, or if a people is perceived as sub-human, whose suffering can be tolerated or condoned; if a people can be murdered with impunity.
In REAL BAD ARABS (Ibid.) Dr. Shaheen is drawing attention to the many Hollywood movies which are produced with the help of the US-Department of Defense, referring to numerous movies where the murder of Arabs is glorified. But it does not stop there. The Pentagon, as well as other defense departments worldwide, invest in Media Corporations, infiltrate the media with so-called “experts and analysts” with ties to civilian and military intelligence services and armed forces. Even the book market is to a large degree controlled by government and military censorship, as demonstrated by the case of Lt. Col. Anthony Schaeffer, whose book “Operation Dark Heart“(6) the Pentagon tried to prevent from entering the market. (7)
After growing up and being indoctrinated to the degree that Arabs utterly have lost their humanity, after growing up and daily being influenced by media reports which are designed to deprive Arabs of their value and dignity as human beings, and after growing up with a constant stream of so-called entertainment that vilifies Arabs while it glorifies the murdering of them without the slightest concern about their humanity, is it surprising, that the populations of the West silently and complicity accept the daily violence that is committed against the people of Palestine, or the recent massacres of tens of thousands of Libyans or Syrians.
After all, Libya and Syria have supported the PLO and Palestinians for decades, so Libyans and Syrians must be heartless terrorists, whom Western military forces and hired mercenaries can massacre with impunity in the tens of thousands. After all, what those people in the West have learned from early childhood via Disney cartoons such as Aladdin, and countless other dehumanizing productions is, that the Arabs, and for most Westerners Libyans are perceived as an Arab country, can be murdered and massacred with impunity. They are, after all barbaric and sub-human, we have learned it from the get go.
The reason why the suffering of the People of Palestine is not perceived as legitimate suffering, on an equal scale with the suffering of the Jewish people in Europe during World War Two, and the suffering of Israelis who are murdered by Palestinians is, that the governments of Western countries systematically have deprived the people of Palestine from their humanity.
It is a fact that human being has an innate resistance against taking another human being’s life. As long as we do not speak in terms of psycho-pathology, it takes months of rigorous military training before a person can overcome this innate human trait.
It does not matter whether one analyzes this aversion against taking another human beings life from a purely moral or ethical perspective, or if one analyzes it from an evolutionary perspective. Our innate unwillingness against taking another human being’s life is meaningful and has the function to preserve ourselves as a species and human civilization.
We can establish as fact, that there is history and theirstory. Both are equally invalid. While history is a function of political control for those who are in positions of relative power, which can be instrumental for dehumanizing others, and for providing apparent legitimacy for the oppression of others, theirstory is often instrumental in recruiting resistance against the dominant powers while dehumanizing the oppressor.
Neither the decades long conflict in Palestine or Israel nor any other conflict can be truly understood, let alone be solved, by a rhetorical approach to the language of the discourse. Language is a powerful instrument that contributes to a great degree to determining our thinking and our actions. Problems in conflicts are only truly comprehended and solved by a language that is free from positioning, scapegoating, and dehumanizing one, while providing legitimacy to the other. Without the foundation of a pure and factual language, even if one is aiming for peace, it is almost impossible to discern which arguments in the Palestinian – Israeli discourse are legitimate and valid, and which are not.
The Need for a Teleological Approach to the Language of the Discourse.
The Palestinian Israeli conflict has lasted for decades, with unimaginable human suffering involved on both sides. This suffering was predominantly on the side of the Palestinians and Arab Israelis, but legitimate suffering has been and is present on both sides.
It must, with all recognition of Israeli suffering, be understood that Israel is not only the one that illegally occupies Palestinian territory; it has also one of the world’s most well equipped military forces which is largely used to control the civilian population that is living under illegal occupation. The conflict has been dominated by decades of both low intensity and high intensity conflict. Both sides have used and are making use of what could be generally described as “terrorism”.
The problems with commonly used approaches to the language of the discourse with regards to the Palestine Israel conflict as well as politically motivated violence in general becomes obvious when one analyzes the different philosophical and scientific approaches that are used for understanding terrorism. Before establishing a teleological approach, let us briefly look at some of the other approaches that are commonly used.
The constructionist and social constructionist approach. With regards to so-called terrorism, the constructionist approach is among other represented by Rom Harré. In his contribution to “Understanding Terrorism” (8), Harré not only emphasizes that the genesis of many psychological phenomena lie in the language and other symbolic systems.
Harré is also correctly drawing attention to the fact that social constructionism does not sufficiently deal with problems such as positioning, scapegoating and labeling. Harré is giving the example of Peter Mandelstam, who said:
“I think the distinction we have to make is not between good and bad terrorists. It is between those terrorists who have political objectives, and are prepared to negotiate these objectives at the end of the day and engage in some kind of political or peace process.“(9).
The example of Peter Mandelstam’s definition (Ibid.) also clearly begs the question, whether so-called terrorists lose legitimacy because their opponent oppresses them to such a degree that they never get to the point where negotiations are possible. Are they less legitimate because they have lost? Harré draws attention to the fact that the one man’s terrorist can be the other one’s freedom fighter. What Harré fails to deliver though, is a model that can help overcome the problems with social constructionism in politics and conflicts.
There are numerous other approaches to the discourse of so-called terrorism. The influence of the social self, the dishonest criminal, and many other which to analyze is beyond the scope of this article. The one most widely taught in Western University Institutes is describing a staircase, beginning with perceived injustice, where the individual who perceives apparent injustice; Where a person is feeling deprived of legitimate and sufficient political influence is slowly radicalized and then driven into the hands of “terrorist” networks who slowly recruit and indoctrinate the person into becoming a terrorist. This theory was developed by the Iranian American Fathali M. Moghaddam (10).
Actually Moghaddam’s theory is a brilliant example for how problems can not be solved. It is also a brilliant example for how so-called terrorism theory actively contributes to prolonging the Palestinian Israeli conflict rather than solving it.
As long as the point of departure is “perceived injustice” (Ibid.) without first analyzing if there is any injustice to be perceived, the theory will not help understanding the functions and mitigating the underlying causes of a conflict and thus not help stop the politically motivated violence. It can at best be useful for reinforcing the victors’, the powerful narrative, that young people are indoctrinated by radicals, without ever analyzing why a group of people is making use of politically motivated violence including the strategy of terrorism.
With respect to the Palestine Israel conflict, Moghaddam’s terrorism theory (Ibid.) is reinforcing the Hollywood narrative. The narrative of the violent Arab, the uncivilized barbarian, who seduces misguided, imbecile young Arab people into becoming vicious and incompetent Arab monsters who have nothing better to do than randomly murdering innocent Israeli citizens for thereafter being murdered with impunity.
It is true that the genesis of many psychological phenomena is to be found in semantics, in language, in words. Semantics partially predetermine social syntax and vice versa. And thus, before we ever arrive at a state where we can discuss legitimate suffering, perceived injustice versus injustice perceived, and how to solve one of the most complex conflicts of the Middle East and the world, we should begin by developing a teleological approach to the language of the discourse.
A teleology is any account that holds that final causes exist in nature. A thing, a process, or an action is teleological, when it is for the end of a final cause (11). In other words, teleology analyzes the “inherent intentionality in all objects, subjects and activities“. This includes politicians, military and paramilitary forces, populations, nationalities, organizations, etc. as well as flowers and bumblebees.
What the author of this article suggests is that the language of the Palestinian Israeli discourse, and that of conflicts in general, must be based on an understanding and application of teleology. The reason why this approach is so crucial for conflict resolution is, that a teleological approach to the language of the discourse makes it impossible to position, scapegoat, excuse, use euphemisms, and so forth. Let us look at some examples.
Hiroshima. The second world war had already cost tens of millions of lives. The United States’ Air Force is a national military force. Terrorism can be described as the tactic of instilling the emotions of fear, terror, and perceived helplessness in a target population with the intention to manipulate a political agenda.
The city of Hiroshima was not of any direct military significance in the sense that it was not heavily defended, and the vast majority of its inhabitants were innocent civilians and non combatants.
With a teleological approach to the language of the discourse of politically motivated violence, the bombing of Hiroshima was;
” The criminal, premeditated mass murder of civilian non combatants by means of a national military force, with the intention to terrorize an entire people and their government into submission, and with the purpose to intimidate and terrorize them so as to accept an unconditional surrender“.
Euphemisms like “we nuked them to end war” are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
The occupation of Palestine is the illegal occupation of a sovereign people’s country by means of military and paramilitary national, occupying forces. The countermeasures against so-called terrorism in the occupied West Bank, such as road blocks, would be utterly unnecessary if Palestine was not illegally occupied, and are designed to intimidate and terrorize.
The bombing of Gaza in 2004 was the terror bombing of a civilian population with the intention to instill the emotion of terror and helplessness, with the intention to intimidate both the Palestinian people and their government into ceasing to continue their legitimate fight for liberation and self-determination. It was terror bombing of non-combatant civilians and premeditated mass murder.
The PFLP-GC is a Palestinian paramilitary organization that uses politically motivated violence with the intention to liberate their country from an illegal occupation.
The PFLP-GC has the declared intention to liberate their country from illegal occupation and it is thus a militant national liberation movement. It also makes use of terror bombing of civilians, as well as it makes use of legitimate and legal military action.
The euphemism “targeted assassination” used by Israel and the United States of America, is a euphemism for premeditated, extrajudicial murder. The brutal violence used by Israeli military forces against civilians in the occupied West Bank amounts to inflicting bodily harm with the purpose to intimidate and instill terror, so as to control the population of an illegally occupied foreign territory.
It is politically motivated, illegal violence and terrorism with the purpose to continue and control an illegal occupation. The Palestinian man or women, who strap a bomb on themselves and explode themselves among non combatants inside Israel are terror bombing civilians with the intention to liberate their country from occupation. Never the less, it is terror bombing of civilian non combatants and premeditated murder too.
Legitimate and Illegitimate Discourses on Palestine and Israel.
The Unique Suffering of the Jewish People
Let there be no doubt. During World War Two the Jewish people of Europe have suffered severe dehumanization. In movies such as “Der Ewige Jude” (12) an entire people were in propaganda movies denounced as rats, as a pest that needed to be removed to safeguard a healthy German population and a strong Germany.
European Jews were systematically deprived of their humanity. It does not matter if the number of six million murdered Jews has been significantly reduced after later years’ research; the fact remains that countless human beings suffered the most appalling abuse. An abuse that hardly would have been possible if the German population had not been manipulated into perceiving them as a pest.
Jewish lobbies often argue that the suffering of the Jewish people was unique, and that they therefore must be granted special rights and privileges. It is an argument that is often used within the context of finding justification for Israel’s aggression in the illegal occupation of Palestine.
With all due respect for those who suffered, but the argument is invalid. Besides the danger of the indescribable suffering of the European Jews being abused to justify the infliction of suffering on others, Palestinians, there are many, like David E. Stannard (13) who argue, that declaring the so-called Holocaust as a unique event, and the positioning of the suffering of the Jewish people as unique suffering, belittles the many other genocides that have been taking place, and those which may come.
Forced labor in the former Belgian colony Congo has, even though the exact numbers are somewhat disputed, contributed to the death of approximately 20 % of the colony’s population (14).
It is clearly problematic that the claim about the uniqueness of the Jewish suffering is not only false, but that it leads to the very relativism in the evaluation of human life that is one of the root causes of the holocaust itself, and of countless other massacres, acts of genocide, innocenticide, and ethnic cleansing.
It is a root cause for the atrocities that those who survived the holocaust, and those who today claim to be the victims’ representatives, are claiming to deplore. With all possible empathy for the victims of the National Socialists’ persecution, the unique suffering is not a valid argument for the establishment of a Jewish state or the state of Israel on the territory of the Palestinian people.
Finally, the insistence of Jewish lobbies that the suffering of the Jewish people is unique, while shamelessly abusing the legitimate suffering of millions of Jews for an extortion racket, which the Jewish American scholar Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein (15) documented in his book “The Holocaust Industry” (16) is contributing to strong, world-wide, anti-Jewish sentiments. It is reinforcing many of the stereotypes that have contributed to the Jewish people being targeted by National Socialists in the first place.
The Historical Argument.
If the historical argument, which is based on the fact that Jewish people were living in historical Israel in biblical times was to be validated as justification for the establishment of the modern state of Israel there would arise a number of problems which are inconsolable with modern international law.
The author of this article is German, born in the region of Germany from where Teutonic people once migrated northwards to the Danish territory known today as Thy. The Danes call Germans Tysker. Those German tribal people had a distinct culture and religion.
Based on the historical argument, a strong lobby should be able to lobby a superpower like the USA into accepting the argument, and German people could initiate a mass migration into northern Denmark. They could then alter the demographics of the area and it would be perfectly legal to provide a Thy-Passport to anyone who could document West German ancestry.
Finally, if the Thy region was divided between Germans and Danes, it would be legitimate to occupy it entirely, to evict Danes from their houses, to force them to live in enclaves with walls around them to protect the occupier. The historical argument is so problematic that it would provoke countless conflicts throughout the world. It is an often used, but nevertheless absolutely invalid and a most dangerous argument.
Legitimacy via the Balfour Declaration.
According to todays’ legal standards, the Balfour Declaration (17) would be considered illegal. The argument that it lends legitimacy to the state of Israel is equivalent to arguing, that any colonial power or nation that is victorious in a war and an occupying power, has the right to significantly change the demography of an occupied territory.
It is absolutely problematic and created a precedent that has since given rise to other conflicts and illegal practices, such as the ongoing establishment of a so-called independent Kosovo.
Imagine for a moment, that Denmark, which still maintains a semi colony on Greenland, granted the Jewish people a homeland in Greenland. Would the Inuit in Greenland have the right to resist, and if necessary by making use of politically motivated violence. The argument is invalid, and the inherent consequences of this type of argument are most dangerous for the peace.
Legitimacy by Virtue of the United Nations.
On 14 May 1948 the provisional government of the self-proclaimed state of Israel, led by Ben Gurion, informed the then US President Truman and the world that the state of Israel was established. Ben Gurion asked Truman to recognize Israel on behalf of the USA.(18)
The US Administration recognized the government of Israel as de facto government within the course of minutes. After failed attempts, it was fully recognized as a member of the United Nations in 1949 (19).
It is important to remember, that the establishment and recognition of Israel happened within the context of a rapidly developing cold war, involving the USSR and the Warsaw Treaty nations on one hand and the USA, the UK, France, and allied as well as occupied nations on the other. It was by no means clear weather Israel would become an ally to the one or the other side of the divide.
One must admit that the Israeli politicians played their hand wisely, gaining maximum support from the USA as well as from the USSR. A support that has since been so extended by the USA that some historians perceive Israel as a part of the American Republic.
The problem with the argument that the recognition of Israel by the United Nations provides legitimacy for the state of Israel is that the United Nations, by recognizing Israel, contradicted main tenets of its own charter. National sovereignty, and the right to self-determination.
The right of Palestinians, Arab, Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike, was grossly neglected by allowing the establishment of a new state within the territory of another, without at least a referendum. The argument that the State of Israel has achieved legitimacy by being recognized by the United Nations Security Counsel and the United Nations General Assembly is thus at least highly problematic, and most likely legally invalid.
The De Facto Argument.
One could argue that the state of Israel has gained legitimacy due to its 60 plus years of de facto existence and functioning. The weakness of this argument is that it provides precedence for illegal practices being legitimized due to having been practiced for a sufficient amount of time. Sadly the de facto legitimization of illegal practices, due to the ability to back the illegal practices with military force, is still commonplace in 2011. The de facto existence argument needs the most careful consideration for a number of reasons.
The most prominent of those reasons are:
The fact that nations are established with the support of superpowers who apply economic, political and military force to support the establishment of nations that are friendly to them is highly problematic. One of those incidents is Kosovo, where the Serbian population has been, and still is subject to oppression by politically motivated violence via KFOR. Thus the United Nations has become an instrument for “nation building” projects, that are opposed to its own charter and principles of peoples right to self-determination.
The fact that the state of Israel is the first nation world-wide, that owes its very existence and legitimacy to the United Nations should oblige Israel to strictly uphold any UNSC resolution which is not in contradiction to the charter of the UN. The de facto reality meanwhile is, that Israel is condescending, and refusing to accept the legitimacy of one UNSC resolution after the other that is critical of Israel, while at the same time using its influence within the USA and EU member states to oppress the natural and human rights of the Palestinian people at the United Nations. An Israel that continues this practice can not legally nor morally rely on being legitimized by the international body which it refuses to adhere to.
It is a fact that Israel has for now 60 plus years committed and continues to commit crimes which are the antithesis of the principles that are enshrined in the charter of the United Nations, from which it claims legitimacy.
Principally those crimes are: The repeated invasions and aggressions against Lebanon with tens of thousands of murdered civilians.
The illegal occupation and annexation of the Golan Highs and parts of Southern Lebanon.
The occupation of Gaza, and after leaving Gaza, the illegal land and maritime siege against Palestinians in Gaza.
The illegal and criminal deprivation of Palestinians in Gaza from basic food items, and medicines, from the ability to trade freely.
The repeated destruction of infrastructure such as electric power plants and water supplies, government buildings, schools, and cultural facilities.
The illegal occupation of the West Bank and the annexation of vast Palestinian territories, leaving Palestinians in the West Bank to live in de facto enclaves that are separated from each other by military installations, illegal settlements, illegal walls that isolate the populations in the enclaves.
The illegal taking of prisoners, including children. The treatment of even uniformed Palestinian liberation fighters as criminals and “terrorists” instead of giving them the status of prisoners of war. The systematic torture of prisoners. Countless human rights abuses.
The use of military ammunitions in civilian areas. The regular use of disproportionate military force. Murder of Palestinian politicians as well as liberation fighters, policemen, and other under an illegal program of what is euphemistically called targeted assassinations.
Daily cruel, degrading and inhumane treatment of Palestinians. The controlling every aspect of individual, family, community and political life. Deportations that amount to ethnic cleansing. Refusing refugees the right to return. A 60 year-long politic of aggression, violence, massacres, deportations and ethnic cleansing that amount to genocide.
Justifications and Justice.
The fact that Israel has the policy of justifying its 60 plus year-long policy of aggression and genocide, or rather innocenticide, does not lend justification to its inhumane treatment of Palestinians. Non of its arguments, not the uniqueness of Jewish suffering; the historical argument; the argument of legitimacy by virtue of the Balfour Declaration; the argument of legitimacy by virtue of the United Nations; nor the de facto argument provide legitimacy for the cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of Palestinians and the systematic genocide that is conducted on a daily basis.
The Right to Resist.
The people of Palestine have every right to resist. They have the right to peaceful resistance, and they have the right to use politically motivated violence. They have however, as understandable their desperation is, not the right to use the same illegal practices that are used against them and which they deplore. The murder of innocent, non-combatant Israeli citizens. The so-called kidnappings of soldiers, such as Gilat Shalit (20) are perfectly legal, provided that prisoners are granted the full rights of prisoners of war to the extend that security allows.
The defamation of armed Palestinian liberation forces as “terrorists”, while terror bombing civilians does not contribute to a solution that could bring security to Israelis or Palestinians. The absolute dis-proportionality of Israeli repression against armed liberation groups, and the indiscriminate murder of civilians does not provide security for Israel, nor for Palestine.
The Right to Return.
Israel’s refusal to respect Palestinian’s right to return on one hand, the steady increase of illegal settlements, the import of Jewish people from throughout the world that significantly changes the demographics in the illegally occupied Palestinian territories on the other, can in spite of all euphemisms, only be described as systematic ethnic cleansing and genocide. Nothing short of genocide embraces the full monstrosity of what has been happening in Palestine for over 60 years, and the monstrosity of what is happening in Palestine every single day.
The Right to Exist.
If the state of Israel ever had the right to exist, it has now spent over 60 years on demonstrating that the recognition of Israel was one of the most tragic mistakes that have been permitted and committed since the end of the second world war. In the eyes of many scholars, worldwide, the consensus that Israel has lost all legitimacy, if it ever had any, is becoming increasingly prevalent. The increasing access to independent media and information will make it exponentially more difficult for Israel to maintain and justify the dehumanization of Palestinians.
Israel must be aware that the support of Western governments for maintaining its criminal practice will only be possible as long as the populations of these countries don’t demand that their governments demand that Israel respects preconditions for their support. Preconditions which Western governments will have to establish as soon as the number of citizens that have had access to factual information is reaching a politically critical mass.
A well-meant word to the Jewish Community.
You are a wonderful people even though we might discuss whether you are a people per se. The author of this article has Jewish people among his good friends. If you are Jewish and you wish to support the cause of the Jewish people, do read this article twice. The best thing that you can do for yourself, for the Jewish people, for Israel, and for peace is this:
A slowly, but ever so slowly increasing number of Israeli soldiers deny to serve within the illegally occupied territories of Palestine. Support them.
A slowly growing community of Jewish people speaks out against the Holocaust Industry. Support them. Both Arab and Jewish Israeli citizens protest and actively resist illegal demolitions of Palestinians homes. Join their cause and demonstrate for those who have suffered at the hands of Jewish people for over 60 years.
Understand that it is a criminal minority that bears responsibility for both the Palestinians and Israelis suffering. Speak out against power. That is your responsibility.
Show them that you have courage to resist against being represented by criminals. Show humanity. Lobby against those lobbies who create hatred rather than understanding. Show the greatness of your people by showing your ability to understand suffering.
Your people have had a genuine and frightening, though not unique suffering brought upon you. Show that you understand that the suffering of the Jewish people was not unique, but that it helps you to be compassionate towards others who suffer too. Show that you are human, and protest against the dehumanization of Arabs and of all human beings, everywhere. Your humanity is the best safeguard against ever being dehumanized again.
Is “Israel” viable.
The short answer is no. No two state solution will ever bring a de facto independently existing Israel or a de facto independently existing Palestine into existence. After decades of “Peace Process” on the track of a two state solution it must have become evident for all parties, that the only viable possibility for peace for Arabs, Christians and Jews alike is one state.
One secular state with the liberty to practice one’s religion of choice. One state that embraces Palestinians’ inalienable right of return. One state that is seeking peace with its neighbors. One state that embraces a policy of immigration, that is fair and balanced, and does not give rise to internal conflicts.
One state that adheres to international law and human rights while maintaining its uniquely rich and fertile cultural elements. Failure to let reason and humanity prevail may very well become one of the root causes for a conflict that ends civilization as we know it. A state for Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Atheists and others alike. It is the only viable solution. And please do not let the choice of a name come in the way of reason and peace. What about Peacerael.
CH/L – nsnbc 13.11.2011
2. Jack G. Shaheen (2001); REAL BAD ARABS, How Hollywood Vilifies A People” Olive Branch Press, New York, New Hampton.
4. The Bombing of Dresden in WW II. Wikipedia. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II
5. The Bombing of Pforzheim in WW II. Wikipedia. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Bombing_of_Pforzheim_in_World_War_II
6. Schaeffer Anthony Lt. Col. (2010); Operation Dark Heart, St. Martins Press, New York.
7. Chris McGreal (2010); Pentagon Tries to stop book, publishing details of US Black-Ops in Pakistan. http://www.pakistankakhudahafiz.com/2010/09/16/pentagon-tries-to-buy-entire-print-run-of-us-spy-expose-operation-dark-heart/
8. Moghaddam F. and Marsella (2004); Understanding Terrorism, American Psychological Association, Washington, USA. pp. 91-102.
9. Mandelstam P. (2001, December 29). IRA aims make them freedom fighters, says Mandelstam. The London Times, p.2
10. Moghaddam Fathali M.; The Staircase to Terrorism. Georgetown University. http://fathalimoghaddam.com/upload/doc/1256627851.pdf
11. Teleology – Wikipedia. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Teleology
12. Der Ewige Jude; Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team. This sites URL was flagged by Google as containing malware.
13. Stannard David E. (1996); The Dangers of Calling the Holocaust Unique, The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://www.codoh.com/reference/dangofcall.html
14. Congo Free State – Wikipedia. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Congo_Free_State
15. Norman Finkelstein Biography. http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/biography/
16. Finkelstein Norman (2001), The Holocaust Industry, Verso, London, New York
17. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 – Wikipedia. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917
18. Press Release about recognition of Israel. http://www.archives.gov/global-pages/larger-image.html?i=/education/lessons/us-israel/images/recognition-press-release-l.jpg&c=/education/lessons/us-israel/images/recognition-press-release.caption.html
19. Recognition of the State of Israel. Palestine Facts. http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_independence_recognition_who.php
20. Littlewood Stuart (2011); Shalit got off lightly, nsnbc international. http://nsnbc.me/2011/10/27/shalit-got-off-lightly/