Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
and then

Palestine not for Sale or Trade

114 posts in this topic

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4375705,00.html

Obama's boy Kerry is probably a little frustrated with the reality that's been faced by so many of his predecessors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.ynetnews....4375705,00.html

Obama's boy Kerry is probably a little frustrated with the reality that's been faced by so many of his predecessors.

The problem is that the militant forces within the palestinians and many of their leaders NEED ongoing conflict to legitimise their leadership, and provide a rationale for their existence. Peace would remove their power base among many moderate arabs; and indeed strengthen moderate arab opinion and power, thus they desire ongoing conflict, from self interest.

No logical rational or intelligent person could believe that the arabs could eliminate Israel (without acces to nuclear weapons) and as long as America supports the jewish sate. And any logical, sane, intelligent and rational, person should be aware that a single nuclear attack on israel would result in the annihilation of many arab cities, infrastructure, and innocent civilians. Israel has a minimum of about 100 nuclear warheads, and quite likely as many as 400.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No logical rational or intelligent person could believe that the arabs could eliminate Israel (without acces to nuclear weapons) and as long as America supports the jewish sate. And any logical, sane, intelligent and rational, person should be aware that a single nuclear attack on israel would result in the annihilation of many arab cities, infrastructure, and innocent civilians. Israel has a minimum of about 100 nuclear warheads, and quite likely as many as 400.

This, you don't p*** off a nuclear power that is will do anything to survive.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both points quite valid but the reality is that many people still push for such actions to eliminate the err... Jewish/Zionist problem. It amazes me the gullibility or hatred that so many display.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Both points quite valid but the reality is that many people still push for such actions to eliminate the err... Jewish/Zionist problem. It amazes me the gullibility or hatred that so many display.

It's not Jewish AND Zionist, it's Jewish OR Zionist. If it's both, then you have to admit that the Jewish identity has been replaced by Zionism. Or else Zionism emulates Judaism so perfectly that the two words Zionism and Jewish are interchangeable.

Look at Jews and Arabs living in unprecedented periods of peace for hundreds of years while Europe bled and burned. This is all about politics man. That's all it is. Money and power, land and resources. It's ghoulish. We should keep our noses and our money out of it.

Edited by Yamato
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This, you don't p*** off a nuclear power that is will do anything to survive.

And the jewish state and people are quite overt and up front about this. After ww2 and their experiences in the ghettos and concentration camps of Europe, they swore they would never again be left so defenceless as a nation, or as a people. While the israelis never even talk about a nuclear first strike, they are absolutely unequivocal about what will happen, if they are attacked by a single nuclear weapon.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It's not Jewish AND Zionist, it's Jewish OR Zionist. If it's both, then you have to admit that the Jewish identity has been replaced by Zionism. Or else Zionism emulates Judaism so perfectly that the two words Zionism and Jewish are interchangeable.

Look at Jews and Arabs living in unprecedented periods of peace for hundreds of years while Europe bled and burned. This is all about politics man. That's all it is. Money and power, land and resources. It's ghoulish. We should keep our noses and our money out of it.

Judaism exists independent of israel, and many jews live all around the world who are not Israelis and do not see them selves as Israelis; but Israel is the jewish homeland and nation state, for both those who live there, and many who do not.

Zionism has become a tainted word but it has a proud heritage. The jews, like all of us, have a right to a physical nation- state where their religion, culture and life, can be represented. So do arab people, including the palestinians. There is room for both in the middle east, but too many people have vested interests in maintaining a conflict scenario..

And of course it is not just the arab israeli conflict. The greatest violence in the modern middle east has been between and within arab states based on religious and cultural divisions. Think back to the seemingly endless conflict in lebanon, and the long and tragic war between iran and iraq, with chemical weapons and waves of human assaults on entrenched positons not seen since the first world war.

100000 to 150000 died in the lebanese civil war. Approx 1,000,000 iranians and up to 500,000 iraqis died in the war between their countries.The death toll in the present syrian civil war is at least 60000 and rising rapidly. Not only that but the conflict is spilling over on religious divisions between sunnis and shia, into lebanon which is only just recovering from its own civil war.

The libyans got off lucky in their civil war, with military casualities of only about 10000, although civilian casualties are unknown. In addition the refugee movement from these wars was many millions of people

Now the figures for TOTAL deaths in all arab israeli conflict since the 1940s is interesting. About 25 000 israelis, and a bit less than 100000 arabs/palestinians. This includes riots, wars, and intifadas. Puts the true geopolitics of the area in a very different perspective, doesn't it?

Edited by Mr Walker
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the jewish state and people are quite overt and up front about this. After ww2 and their experiences in the ghettos and concentration camps of Europe, they swore they would never again be left so defenceless as a nation, or as a people. While the israelis never even talk about a nuclear first strike, they are absolutely unequivocal about what will happen, if they are attacked by a single nuclear weapon.

As I'm sure any follower of this forum is aware, I am routinely called out as being variously deluded, biased, a freak or racist because of my approval of the state of Israel and of Zionism in general. A major component of my support for Israel hinges on the FACT that what you say is true. These people mean it when they say 'never again' yet the world seems hell bent on calling them on this. The situation is supernatural imo. It makes no sense to expect a people to commit national and personal suicide due to a pr effort. Yet many have exactly that expectation. It boggles the mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judaism exists independent of israel, and many jews live all around the world who are not Israelis and do not see them selves as Israelis; but Israel is the jewish homeland and nation state, for both those who live there, and many who do not.

Zionism has become a tainted word but it has a proud heritage. The jews, like all of us, have a right to a physical nation- state where their religion, culture and life, can be represented. So do arab people, including the palestinians. There is room for both in the middle east, but too many people have vested interests in maintaining a conflict scenario..

Zionists are critical of those Jews across the world who don't identify with Israel. I agree with your 2nd paragraph, and the US is such a physical state that meets those requirements. We don't believe that Wiccans have a right to their own physical land just because they're Wiccans. We believe that people should be able to practice their own beliefs freely without interference. Because they're people, not because they identify with this group and not that group.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Unfair.jpg Edited by B Jenkins
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfair.jpg

I like this - it's accurate and I agree with the policy that makes it so. Israel is the HOME OF THE JEWS. If she doesn't want to live there then she isn't forced to. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're happy with the mass displacement of a people?

And Then, you and I disagree as much as we agree, but I've never actually thought of you as callous and cruel. He was kicked out of the land of his fathers because a third party (note - not God this time) gave that land to someone else. How is that fair? Now, if God had made it happen, had he inspired a new Moses to lead the Jews back to Israel, I'd be compassionate towards the displaced, but it's God's will, God wins. This iteration of Israel isn't God's will though, it hasn't been divinely inspired, the masses haven't been led back to their Promised Land by a Prophet. They're there, that's a fact. They'll stay there. that's also a fact. But they're also the aggressors as much as the Palestinians are. Noone is right. Everyone is going to lose unless both sides says "fine, today is the last day of missiles and bulldozers" and they try and build a tomorrow everyone can compromise to live in.

The Israelis have God on their side, they'll end up with all the Israel they are meant to have when God decides it's time for them to have it, not when they just want it.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zionism has become a tainted word but it has a proud heritage. The jews, like all of us, have a right to a physical nation- state where their religion, culture and life, can be represented. So do arab people, including the palestinians. There is room for both in the middle east, but too many people have vested interests in maintaining a conflict scenario..

Apply that logic to a lot of indigenous people and we'd have a loooot of more states in lots of places in the world. In reality it's the one who gets pummeled that gives in. If people are wiped out or move out themselves, any people, then you can only prevent that with divine intervention if your god does that. I doubt that since the alleged god doesn't prevent a ton of other atrocities, unless it's a picky god you have. A god whose subjective mindset drives over objective.

Home is what you make of it, and looking at all the other indigenous people who were forced from their lands, not just the american indians, all those seemed to have some sort of faith. Thinking you got it right with religion doesn't necessarily make it so, I doubt many trust god as much as they do a weapon, legistlation, diplomacy and plain scheming. This all is not to say that god wouldn't exist, just how things work in practise, at least until there's a divine intervention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that the militant forces within the palestinians and many of their leaders NEED ongoing conflict to legitimise their leadership, and provide a rationale for their existence. Peace would remove their power base among many moderate arabs; and indeed strengthen moderate arab opinion and power, thus they desire ongoing conflict, from self interest.

No logical rational or intelligent person could believe that the arabs could eliminate Israel (without acces to nuclear weapons) and as long as America supports the jewish sate. And any logical, sane, intelligent and rational, person should be aware that a single nuclear attack on israel would result in the annihilation of many arab cities, infrastructure, and innocent civilians. Israel has a minimum of about 100 nuclear warheads, and quite likely as many as 400.

Do you even know what you’re talking about? The whole world has recognised the Right for a Palestinian State except for Israel and the US. The only one stalling the Peace process is Netanyahu and his Right Wing, Zionist Govt. The PA have recognised Israel while Israel has never stopped building settlements. These were both fundamental choke points to previous peace talks.

“No logical rational or intelligent person could believe that the arabs could eliminate Israel (without acces to nuclear weapons) and as long as America supports the jewish sate.” What is that supposed to mean? That the US has made Israel invincible with nukes and whatever they want, they get?? LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.ynetnews....4375705,00.html

Obama's boy Kerry is probably a little frustrated with the reality that's been faced by so many of his predecessors.

What do you expect when even Obama had to back off in the past when he tried to get Israel to come to the party and join in the peace talks. Just to point out, Hamas aren't involved in the peace talks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the jewish state and people are quite overt and up front about this. After ww2 and their experiences in the ghettos and concentration camps of Europe, they swore they would never again be left so defenceless as a nation, or as a people. While the israelis never even talk about a nuclear first strike, they are absolutely unequivocal about what will happen, if they are attacked by a single nuclear weapon.

Oh really now??!! Are you even aware that Israel are the only ones with nuclear weapons in the whole region and while every other nation in the world is expected to abide by the NPT they've never been a signatory to it, built nukes regardless of others, threaten other nations for not following the NPT and on top of this, you make it sound RIGHT, if they decide to nuke others who threaten them.

Mate, I suggest you do some research before spouting nonsense.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judaism exists independent of israel, and many jews live all around the world who are not Israelis and do not see them selves as Israelis; but Israel is the jewish homeland and nation state, for both those who live there, and many who do not.

See B Jenkins post. I call this Apartheid and the reason Palestinians cannot call Israel a Jewish State.

Zionism has become a tainted word but it has a proud heritage. The jews, like all of us, have a right to a physical nation- state where their religion, culture and life, can be represented. So do arab people, including the palestinians. There is room for both in the middle east, but too many people have vested interests in maintaining a conflict scenario..

Finally, something that makes sense although, as I pointed out, the only ones at the moment with a vested interest are the Zionists in Govt.

And of course it is not just the arab israeli conflict. The greatest violence in the modern middle east has been between and within arab states based on religious and cultural divisions. Think back to the seemingly endless conflict in lebanon, and the long and tragic war between iran and iraq, with chemical weapons and waves of human assaults on entrenched positons not seen since the first world war.

100000 to 150000 died in the lebanese civil war. Approx 1,000,000 iranians and up to 500,000 iraqis died in the war between their countries.The death toll in the present syrian civil war is at least 60000 and rising rapidly. Not only that but the conflict is spilling over on religious divisions between sunnis and shia, into lebanon which is only just recovering from its own civil war.

The libyans got off lucky in their civil war, with military casualities of only about 10000, although civilian casualties are unknown. In addition the refugee movement from these wars was many millions of people

Now the figures for TOTAL deaths in all arab israeli conflict since the 1940s is interesting. About 25 000 israelis, and a bit less than 100000 arabs/palestinians. This includes riots, wars, and intifadas. Puts the true geopolitics of the area in a very different perspective, doesn't it?

The Israeli/Palestinian is geopolitical while the Arab Spring struggle is revolutionary. Not comparable.

But I do agree on your point about the Sunni/Shia war that's been raging since the Iran-Iraqi conflict. If your intention was to show the true nature of the affects of religion in the ME and for that matter, around the world, then you've hit the nail on the head. Religion is and has been the force of evil throughout human history, causing more deaths to human lives than any other disease, plague, natural distaster etc, could ever cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zionists are critical of those Jews across the world who don't identify with Israel. I agree with your 2nd paragraph, and the US is such a physical state that meets those requirements. We don't believe that Wiccans have a right to their own physical land just because they're Wiccans. We believe that people should be able to practice their own beliefs freely without interference. Because they're people, not because they identify with this group and not that group.

I appreciate that many jews, especially, those who have chosen, physically and ideologically, to make Israel their home, feel that all jews should have the same feelings and attachments, but humans simply aren't that simple in their world views.

And, practically, the large and influential jewish lobbies in many countries like Australia and the United sates perhaps serve Israel more powerfully; economically, politically and strategically, than if they all chose to up stakes and move to Israel. I have no time for modern revisionist history and hence little for the anti Israeli feeling by some. Leaving religion totally out of it, jews and palestinian arabs BOTH, have political legal and moral rights to home land. From my reading of modern politics the jewish stte has never denied this althought some jews might. On the other hand it has long been the policy of most muslim states that Israel has no right to exist and should be destroyed. That is both not acceptable in legal moral or social terms, and not is going to happen given current geopolitical realities,, but it makes peace talks and a settlement on peaceful terms, very difficult.

Jewish people have the same right to historical territory as say the british, french or americans. And so do palestinians. But this has to be reconciled to allow both peoples this right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're happy with the mass displacement of a people?

And Then, you and I disagree as much as we agree, but I've never actually thought of you as callous and cruel. He was kicked out of the land of his fathers because a third party (note - not God this time) gave that land to someone else. How is that fair? Now, if God had made it happen, had he inspired a new Moses to lead the Jews back to Israel, I'd be compassionate towards the displaced, but it's God's will, God wins. This iteration of Israel isn't God's will though, it hasn't been divinely inspired, the masses haven't been led back to their Promised Land by a Prophet. They're there, that's a fact. They'll stay there. that's also a fact. But they're also the aggressors as much as the Palestinians are. Noone is right. Everyone is going to lose unless both sides says "fine, today is the last day of missiles and bulldozers" and they try and build a tomorrow everyone can compromise to live in.

The Israelis have God on their side, they'll end up with all the Israel they are meant to have when God decides it's time for them to have it, not when they just want it.

The original refugees were generally NOT kicked out. They chose to move. They could have stayed within the state of Israel. Most chose not to because it was not a safe place, as an ongoing guerilla war followed by a real war, was happening all around them. They thought the stae of israel would be invaded and destroyed by brother arabs, and they would be able to return in a short time.

Others thought that they could not remain as citizens of a jewish state being muslims, despite legally being allowed to do so. (and many many arabs maintained continuity of life within Israel.)

The reasons they cannot return are complex but not basically the fault of israeli policies. Ongoing wars and enmity have made it difficult, also the mood and power within palestinian refugee camps and displaced groups has made it difficult for any to even seek return to Israel (a nd hard for Israel to accept such requests)

The original mandate of Isreal was much smaller than at present but its present size and the displacement of the arab inhabitants came about because the arabs lost the war and territory which they had initiated, expecting to easily crush israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Apply that logic to a lot of indigenous people and we'd have a loooot of more states in lots of places in the world. In reality it's the one who gets pummeled that gives in. If people are wiped out or move out themselves, any people, then you can only prevent that with divine intervention if your god does that. I doubt that since the alleged god doesn't prevent a ton of other atrocities, unless it's a picky god you have. A god whose subjective mindset drives over objective.

Home is what you make of it, and looking at all the other indigenous people who were forced from their lands, not just the american indians, all those seemed to have some sort of faith. Thinking you got it right with religion doesn't necessarily make it so, I doubt many trust god as much as they do a weapon, legistlation, diplomacy and plain scheming. This all is not to say that god wouldn't exist, just how things work in practise, at least until there's a divine intervention.

To me, religion has nothing to do with the ethical, legal, and moral dimensions of this issue. Religion makes a settlement more politically difficult because, in part, otherwise we could have one nation state including arabs and jews. It is no more realistic to seek the removal of jews, or a jewish state from israe than it is to remove black and white americans from the americas as well as the current form of government and return it to indigenous peoples under some other form of governance. (Same for australia or anywhere else) It aint going to happen so get people should get over it, make the best and fairest accomodations you can for the people affected, and move forward.

One problem is that Israel has consistently been prepared to return land won in defence of its country for peace, and has done so, but never been given the peace part of the deal. A lot of Israleis are disillusioned, and disinclined to believe that trading land for peace accords will make them safer, or the area more peaceful.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Do you even know what you’re talking about? The whole world has recognised the Right for a Palestinian State except for Israel and the US. The only one stalling the Peace process is Netanyahu and his Right Wing, Zionist Govt. The PA have recognised Israel while Israel has never stopped building settlements. These were both fundamental choke points to previous peace talks.

“No logical rational or intelligent person could believe that the arabs could eliminate Israel (without acces to nuclear weapons) and as long as America supports the jewish sate.” What is that supposed to mean? That the US has made Israel invincible with nukes and whatever they want, they get?? LOL.

Israell recognises the right for a palestinian state, and in a way always has, from the time of partition. It is not prepared to give up its own right to existence to allow this, however The problem lies with other arabs who do not want an Israeli state at all. A palestinian state and an israeli state should be able to coexist peacefully.

And no. Israel developed its own nuclear weapons programme and its own weapons. The Us opposed israeli nuclear weapons develpment and ironically some of the technology was stolen via espionage form the USA.

It has never used them in 40 years of provocation and has never used the threat of them to gain its own ends, in fact it has stated many times in the last half century that it will never be the first country to introduce the use of weapons into the middle east. However, it has made it clear that any NUCLEAR attack on israel would result in annihilation for the attackers.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh really now??!! Are you even aware that Israel are the only ones with nuclear weapons in the whole region and while every other nation in the world is expected to abide by the NPT they've never been a signatory to it, built nukes regardless of others, threaten other nations for not following the NPT and on top of this, you make it sound RIGHT, if they decide to nuke others who threaten them.

Mate, I suggest you do some research before spouting nonsense.

LOL its ironic really Heres me with a degree in international politics having grown upliving throughthe later part of this conflict and having a life time of reading on the topic being asked to do research

Are you awre tha the islamist leaders of iran have publicaaly declared tha their rationale for building nuclear weapons is to use them to destroy the state of israel The worrying thing is that two or three medium sized nuclear weapons could indeed destroy the state, and all the people of israel.

Of course there would be collateral damge to a few milion local arabs and arab states but to the leaders of iran that would probably make them martyrs in ths cause and accepetable collateral damge In response to this threat and indeed much older threats by arab states to 'elimiate' Israel and "exterminate ' the jews, Israel has developed a tactical force capable of destroying any attacker(s)

Given the relative geographic size dispersion and numbers of potential agressors, that force is significant in size, but that is irrelevant if it is never used. I lived through the cold war, the cuban missile crisis etc and, sadly, the nuclear deterrence is a very effective tool.

Would israel destroy iranian capacity to create nuclear weapons, before they actually have them? I would hope so. I wish the americans had done this before North Korea developed its own nuclear weapons. It would limit the potential death and destruction by a huge amount. Imagine a nuclear attack on south korea and the consequences of any response. Two nations probably annihilated and many many millions killed. Far better to have destroyed North Korea's abilty to produce such weapons before they had them.

Ps there is also the very real, if hard to assess, probabilty of arabs getting hold of smaller tactical nuclear weapons from other states, particularly muslim parts of the old soviet union, through clandestine means or even with the consent of those states. Many arab states have the wealth and the theological determination to do this, if they could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See B Jenkins post. I call this Apartheid and the reason Palestinians cannot call Israel a Jewish State.

Finally, something that makes sense although, as I pointed out, the only ones at the moment with a vested interest are the Zionists in Govt.

The Israeli/Palestinian is geopolitical while the Arab Spring struggle is revolutionary. Not comparable.

But I do agree on your point about the Sunni/Shia war that's been raging since the Iran-Iraqi conflict. If your intention was to show the true nature of the affects of religion in the ME and for that matter, around the world, then you've hit the nail on the head. Religion is and has been the force of evil throughout human history, causing more deaths to human lives than any other disease, plague, natural distaster etc, could ever cause.

I will only comment on the last part of your post. It is just wrong and ridiculously wrong. Diseases such as the black death and spanish flu, along with measles, mumps, chicken pox, diptheria, malaria, cholera etc have killed many times more humans than ALL the wars in human history, let alone religious based wars. About 7-8 out of every 10 children born up until a few centuries ago died from natural causes and about half of all women died in child birth or from complications arising from childbirth. Right now, in our modern world, about 1,000000 humans die from malaria EVERY year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original refugees were generally NOT kicked out. They chose to move. They could have stayed within the state of Israel. Most chose not to because it was not a safe place, as an ongoing guerilla war followed by a real war, was happening all around them. They thought the stae of israel would be invaded and destroyed by brother arabs, and they would be able to return in a short time.

Others thought that they could not remain as citizens of a jewish state being muslims, despite legally being allowed to do so. (and many many arabs maintained continuity of life within Israel.)

Bull, most were ethnically cleansed by the Zionists whole expulsed them with force and a campaign of terror.

Benny Morris published three books detailing the reasons for the Israeli ⁄ Palestinian conflict and the core issue the displacement of the Palestinians played in creating the present state of Israel 8:

Israel’s Border Wars, 1949-1956: Arab Infiltration, Israeli Retaliation and the Countdown to the Suez War (1993)

The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1948 (1987)

Jews and Arabs in Palestine ⁄ Israel, 1936-1956 (2000)

Based on declassified and newly opened archives from Israeli government and military sources, these books detail the removal of many Palestinians villages to create room for the Jewish State and its intent to import millions of Jews.

According to Morris and other Israeli historians, the reasons Palestinians left these localities were:

Expulsion by Zionist ⁄ Jewish forces - 122 localities

Military assault by Zionist ⁄ Jewish forces - 270 localities

Fear of Zionist ⁄ Jewish attack, or of being caught in the fighting, influence of the fall of neighboring town, and psychological warfare - 12 localities

Abandonment on Arab orders - 6 localities

Unknown - 34 localities

213 Palestinian villages and towns (population 413,794, 52% of the refugees) were “cleansed” while under the “protection” of the British mandate; that is before the start of the Arab-Israeli war on May 15, 1948. 264 localities with 339,272 inhabitants (42%) were vacated during 1948 War. After signing the Armistice Agreements, 54 localities were ethnically cleansed (52,001 people or 6% of refugees).

Usually, the cleansing (“Nikayon,” a word used frequently in Israeli military communications at the time) was initiated by massacres. Plan Dalet was started to conquer the area between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and it commenced in earnest following the massacre of Deir Yassin on April 9, 1948. This was followed by several other massacres, which terrorized the Palestinians into leaving. Palestinians were terrorized by 33 massacres in total: Al Abbasiyya (4 May ‘48), Abu Shusha (14 May ‘48), Ayn az Zaytun (2 May ‘48), Balad ash Sheikh (25 April ‘48), Bayt Daras (11 May ‘48), Beer Sheba (21 Oct ‘48), Burayr (12 May ‘48), Al Dawayima (29 Oct ‘48), Deir Yassin (9 April ‘48), Eilaboun (29 Oct ‘48), Haifa (21 April ‘48), Hawsha (15 April ‘48), Husayniyya (21 April ‘48), Ijzim (24 July ‘48), Isdud (28 Oct ‘48), Jish (29 Oct ‘48), Al Kabri (21 May ‘48), Al Khisas (18 Dec ‘48), Khubbayza (12 May ‘48), Lydda (10 July ‘48), Majd al Kurum (29 October ‘48), Mannsurat al Khayt (18 Jan ‘48), Khirbet, Nasir ad Din (12 April ‘48), Qazaza (9 July ‘48), Qisarya (15 Feb ‘48), Sa’sa (30 Oct ‘48), Safsaf (29 Oct ‘48), Saliha (30 Oct ‘48), Arab al Samniyya (30 Oct ‘48), Al Tantoura (21 May ‘48), Al Tira (16 July ‘48), Al Wa’ra al-Sawda (18 April ‘48), Wadi ‘Ara (27 Feb ‘48).

Over half of these crimes were committed while the area was still under British mandate and presumed protection. Deir Yassin became the most famous massacre simply because of its ferocity and the fact that over 20 villagers were taken to a nearby Jewish settlement, paraded as game, and then killed to incite panic among the Palestinian natives. Menahem Begin, who later became a Prime Minister of Israel, gloated about the massacre in his book about this period: “The legend in Deir Yassin helped us in particular in the saving of Tiberia and the conquest of Haifa...All the Jewish forces proceeded to advance through Haifa like a knife through butter. The Arabs began fleeing in panic, shouting Deir Yassin...Arabs throughout the country were seized by limitless panic and started to flee for their lives.”9

These were not acts of horror that occurred during combat (and there were many) but were instead a premeditated plan to cleanse and terrorize the indigenous Palestinian population. In December 20, 1940 Joseph Weitz, responsible for Jewish colonization, a senior Zionist official, and respected member of Ben Gurion’s inner circle wrote in his diary:

...It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both peoples...If the Arabs leave it, the country will become wide and spacious for us...The only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western land of Israel [i.e. Palestine since Transjordan is the eastern portion], without Arabs. There is no room here for compromises...There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer all of them, save perhaps for Bethlehem, Nazareth, and the old Jerusalem. Not one village must be left, not one tribe. The transfer must be directed at Iraq, Syria, and even Transjordan. For this goal funds will be found...And only after this transfer will the country be able to absorb millions of our brothers and the Jewish problem will cease to exist. There is no other solution.10

Joseph Weitz became chair of the Land and Forest department of the Jewish National Fund. In 1950 he wrote, “The struggle for the redemption of the land means...the liberation of the land from the hand of the stranger, from the chains of wilderness; the struggle for its conquest by settlement, and...the redemption of the settler, both as a human being and as a Jew, through his deep attachment to the soil he tills.”11

Joseph Weitz’s mentor and leader was Ben Gurion, who became Israel’s first prime minister. Historians have written extensively about Ben Gurion’s philosophy and statements regarding the non-Jewish residents in the “Promised Land.” Ben Gurion encouraged his followers to be circumspect about openly advocating transfer, because this could then be used as an argument to limit Jewish immigration due to limited space. We find him stating things like this in 1938:

With compulsory transfer we [would] have vast areas...I support compulsory transfer. I do not see anything immoral in it. But compulsory transfer could only be carried out by England...Had its implementation been dependent merely on our proposal, I would have proposed; but this would be dangerous to propose when the British government has disassociated itself from compulsory transfer...But this question should not be removed from the agenda because it is a central question. There are two issues here: 1) sovereignty and 2) the removal of a certain number of Arabs, and we must insist on both of them.12

Here is a testimony of an Israeli soldier who participated in the massacre at al Duwayima Village, on October 29, 1948:

[They] killed between 80 to 100 Arabs, women and children. To kill the children they fractured their heads with sticks. There was not one house without corpses. The men and women of the villages were pushed into houses without food or water. Then the saboteurs came to dynamite the houses. One commander ordered a soldier to bring two women into a house he was about to blow up... Another soldier prided himself upon having raped an Arab woman before shooting her to death. Another Arab woman with her newborn baby was made to clean the place for a couple of days, and then they shot her and the baby. Educated and well-mannered commanders who were considered ‘good guys’...became base murderers, and this not in the storm of battle, but as a method of expulsion and extermination. The fewer the Arabs who remained, the better.13

Morris cites similar testimonies.14 A village elder (Mukhtar) is cited as handing a list of 580 killed to the Jordanian governor of Hebron at the time. Morris details the life of Yosef Nachmani, a high-ranking member of the underground Haganah forces, the precursor to Israeli Army. Nachmani was also director of the offices of the Jewish National Fund in Tiberias. Nachmani was responsible for settling land throughout the Galilee and Jezreel Valley regions. At first, he supported the Palestinian transfer, but later in his life he underwent a profound change. One entry in Nachmani’s journal Morris translates, “The acts of cruelty committed by our soldiers. After they went into Safsaf, the village and its people raised a white flag. They separated the men from the women, tied the hands of some 50 to 60 peasants and shot and killed them, burying them in a single hole. They also raped a number of the women from the village...In Salha, which raised a white flag, they carried out a real massacre, killing men and women, about 60 to 70 people. Where did they find such a degree of cruelty like that of the Nazis? They learned from them.”

Recently released Red Crescent documents also strongly suggest that the first time biological warfare was used was in Palestine in 1948, when diseases were spread in Haifa and ‘Akka (Acre).15

Morris, while providing ample evidence for how the ethnic cleansing happened, still contended that it was not part of a grand scheme of expulsion. His critics argued that this conclusion is in direct contradiction to the incredible wealth of data that he presents. Morris defended his thesis thus:

Certainly Ben-Gurion wanted as few Arabs as possible to remain in Israel. Certainly the majority of the country’s political and military leaders were happy to see the Arabs go. Certainly, many officers and officials did what they could to facilitate departure, including occasional expulsions (though, as I pointed out in Birth, in most towns and villages the Haganah ⁄ IDF had no need to issue expulsion orders as the inhabitants fled before the Jewish troops reached the site; the inhabitants usually fled with the approach of the advancing Jewish column or when the first mortar bombs began to hit their homes). But between what most people want and policy, there is, and was then, a line of demarcation.16

In a more recent writing, Morris stated: “Above all, let me reiterate, the refugee problem was caused by attacks by Jewish forces on Arab villages and towns and by the inhabitants’ fear of such attacks, compounded by expulsions, atrocities, and rumors of atrocities — and by the crucial Israeli Cabinet decision in June 1948 to bar a refugee return.”17

Thus, the distinction as to whether a master plan of expulsion existed or not was as lost to the Palestinian victims as the distinction as to whether Hitler had a master plan for extermination of European Jewry had on its victims. Irrespective as to whether there was a distinct high-level strategy that was disseminated down, the actions on the ground both before and after the establishment of the state of Israel made it clear as to desired goal and the net outcome. Statements by Zionist leaders are logical though chilling in their correspondence to events on the ground. Yosef Weitz, Director of the Jewish National Fund Lands Department was very active as of March 1948, in planning for and implementing plans to expel the Palestinians, destroy their villages, and build new homes for the influx of new Jewish immigrants. These activities were given in detail by Morris and other authors. For example, Weitz narrates a conversation with Moshe Shertok (later renamed Sharret, Israeli foreign minister, and future Prime Minister of Israel):

Transfer-post factum; should we do something so as to transform the exodus of the Arabs from the country into a fact, so that they return no more?...His [shertok’s] answer: he blesses any initiative in this matter. His opinion is also that we must act in such a way as to transform the exodus of the Arabs into an established fact.18

Morris does not deny that massacres took place intentionally to scare the natives into leaving or that outright expulsions occurred in other places as part of Plan Dalet. However, his main observation is that the exodus was also facilitated by general panic and other issues beyond the deliberate acts of the Zionist forces and thus did not amount to a master plan of expulsion. Other historians, such as Nur Masalha and Avi Shlaim, disagree, arguing that the evidence is overwhelming in favor of premeditated and coordinated acts of expulsion. Still, even Morris points out that his research once and for all shattered the myths perpetuated in such popular Zionist books as of Joan Peters’ From Time Immemorial.

Israeli journalist Gideon Levy reviewed Morris’s book (Jews and Arabs in Palestine ⁄ Israel, 1936-1956, 2000) stating:

And now, the IDF archives have been opened and there we find a cable dated October 31, 1948, signed by Major General Carmel and addressed to all the division and district commanders under his command. Apparently, Carmel’s troops carried out massacres in no less than 10 villages in the north of the country. They would gather the men of these villages in the square, choose a few of them, sometimes dozens, stand them up against a wall and shoot them.

Terrible things were done after the War of Independence, too; for example, in the town of Majdal in 1950...Some 10,000 Palestinians lived in Majdal before the war and, in October 1948, thousands more refugees from nearby villages joined them. Majdal fell in November and most of its residents and refugees fled wherever they could, leaving some 3,000 inhabitants, mostly women and the elderly. Majdal was too close to Gaza for Israel’s liking. In December 1948, IDF soldiers “swept through” the town and deported some 500 of its remaining inhabitants. In 1949, Yigal Allon demanded, “to transfer all the Arab inhabitants.” Ben-Gurion objected. An inter-ministerial committee for the “transfer of Arabs from place to place” — yes, we had one of those as well — decided to thin out the population somewhat; another ministerial committee — “on abandoned property” — decided to settle Majdal with Jews. From committee to committee, Majdal was “Judaized,” until, with 2,500 Jewish residents, it became known as Migdal-Ad. In December 1949, more Arabs were deported so as to vacate a few more houses — “abandoned property” — for a few more discharged soldiers. The IDF made the life of those Arabs who remained a misery, hoping they’d get the message. The new commanding officer of the Southern Command, Moshe Dayan, rekindled the ideas of his predecessor, Yigal Allon.

‘I hope that perhaps in the coming years, there will be another opportunity to transfer these Arabs [170,000 Israeli Arabs - G.L.] out of the Land of Israel,’ he said at a meeting of the Mapai faction, outlining its ideas while in uniform. Dayan backed up his words with actions: He submitted a detailed proposal for “the evacuation of the Arab inhabitants of the town of Majdal.” The chief of staff agreed and Ben-Gurion authorized the plan. The government was circumvented, the Histadrut labor federation objected, and Rabin informed the residents.

The transfer began at the beginning of 1950, although the “official operation” took off in June. There were still those who spoke of dispersing the Arabs around the country; in the end, they were deported to Gaza. They were loaded onto trucks and dropped off at the border — “deliveries,” as they were termed. Just to remind you again, the state already existed. The last delivery of 229 people left for Gaza on October 21.

Back in Israel, the officials pondered over how to distribute the “abandoned” houses, most of which went to individuals who had some political clout. In 1956, Migdal-Ad changed its name to Ashkelon. To this very day, the former residents of Majdal live in the shacks and shanties of the refugee camps in Gaza.

How many Israelis know this story? How many have heard it before? How many have ever thought of the refugees on whose destroyed homes the city of Ashkelon was founded?

...Morris concludes: ‘Zionism has always had two faces: a constructive, moral, compromising and considerate aspect; and a destructive, selfish, militant, chauvinistic-racist one... The simultaneous existence of these two facets was one of the most significant keys to the success of Zionism.’

But, there were also incidents in which they shot — oh, how they shot — and didn’t weep at all. And lied. This is the picture that emerges from the chapter about the Israeli press at the time of the Kibiya affair, which expresses the dark side of the then already five-year-old state: no longer a community struggling to establish a country, but an orderly, victorious state, thought of as a democracy, with David Ben-Gurion, who lies, poker-faced, and its press, which brazenly conceals scandalous information from its readers and even lies knowingly - all for the glory of the State of Israel.

....in the wake of the way in which the new Intifada has been covered by sections of the Israeli media, I was faced with the following question: Have we really changed, or perhaps, in testing times, does the Israeli press return to its bad old place of being the state’s trumpet, just as it was in Kibiya, just as Morris describes? Then, the press inflamed passions by giving prominence to the Israeli victims (relatively few) and playing down the Arab ones (tenfold more), greatly enhancing the Israelis’ sense of being the victim, the exclusive sufferers. So, is there anything new under the sun?19

Aside from the myths surrounding the dispossession of the Palestinians, there were other myths promulgated during the 1947 to 1949 time period. It is now documented that this was not a defensive war on the part of the nascent Jewish State. As previously explained, over half the Palestinian villages were depopulated by planned operations carried out before the “Arab armies” intervened. The additional myth of the numerical inferiority of Israeli forces is also easily verified and dispelled. An Israeli historian of that war performed fighting force calculations and concluded that: “indeed, there was never a moment in the 1948 Palestine war that the Jewish forces suffered a numerical inferiority against the Arab forces which they fought.”20

But Zionists were not completely satisfied in the removal of 85% of the native people in the areas they occupied. David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister, wrote: “If we were an army and not many armies, and if we acted according to [one] strategic plan, we would have been able to ‘empty’ the [Palestinian] population of the upper Galilee, Jerusalem and the road to it, Ramallah, Ludda, South of Palestine in general and the Negev [An-Naqab] in particular.”21 The nascent state immediately embarked on a program of plunder and destruction of the Palestinian homes, property, and possessions left behind. Dr. Don Peretz (of the State University of New York) wrote in 1954,

...[N]early half of the new Jewish immigrants live in homes abandoned by the Arabs. They occupy nearly 400 Arab towns and villages...The Arabs left over 10,000 shops and stores in Jewish hands. The Israel Custodian of Absentee Property took over more than 4,000,000 dunams of former Arab land, or nearly 60% of the country’s cultivable area. This was nearly two and a half times the total Jewish-owned property at the time the state of Israel was established, and include most of its olive orchards, a large part of its fruit and vegetable cropland and almost half the citrus groves.22

In Lydda and Ramle, where 60,000 inhabitants were forcibly expelled at gunpoint, the Israeli army loaded 1,800 trucks worth of looted property from Lydda alone.23 Hadawi estimates Palestinian losses in land and property to be valued at 562 billion US 1998 dollars.24 These are only the direct material losses and do not include loss of life, suffering, injuries, and loss of income.

Meron Benvenisti wrote in his book Sacred Landscape: the Buried History of the Holy Land Since 1948:

The signing of the armistice agreement did not put an end to the expulsions [by Israel]. In late February 1949, the remaining inhabitants of the township of Faluja and the village of Iraq al-Manshiyya ... were expelled. Approximately 3,000 people were ejected from their communities, despite Israel’s having guaranteed that they could remain there with full security to themselves, their homes, and all their property.25

Following the initial and the largest expulsion of the Palestinians between 1947-1949, the state of Israel started a program to further “cleanse” what remains of the Palestinian areas. Thus, an Israeli writer wrote about Nazareth area (the largest remaining Palestinian and mostly Christian Arab) town:

Upper Nazareth, which was created some fifteen years ago, ‘in order to create a counterweight to the Arab Nazareth,’ constitutes a cornerstone of the ‘Judaization of the Galilee’ policy. Upper Nazareth was erected upon the hills surrounding Nazareth as a security belt surrounding it almost on all sides. It was built upon thousands of acres of lands which were expropriated high-handedly, purely and simply by force, from the Arab settlements, particularly Nazareth and Rana.26

The land acquired by the Jewish National Fund (JNF) from the state of Israel in 1961 was 3,507,000 dunums while the state and development authority controlled 15,205,000 dunums of a total of 20,323,000 dunums in Israel.27 The Israel Land Authority was given control of all lands (whether JNF or State land) and thus controlled most of the land in Israel. This Palestinian land was procured through a variety of mechanisms and then leased only to Jews. This is the land that the Kibbutzim were later built on. Still later, with the bankruptcy of the Kibbutz movement, Ariel Sharon and other ardent Zionists pushed for selling this land to Jews and giving the kibbutz leaders the money.

Israel claimed that it was unifying the city of Jerusalem after its occupation in 1967, and proceeded to settle Jews in the eastern part of the city, including the old Jewish quarter. In this previously Palestinian area many Palestinians had already been evicted from their homes that in 1948 became Jewish West Jerusalem. The reciprocal and fair solution of allowing Palestinian to go back to the houses they left behind in 1948 in West Jerusalem was not contemplated in the process of “unification” between 1967 and 1969. Israel instead embarked on a program of deliberate further thinning of the Palestinians remaining in the expanded boundaries of Jerusalem.

Expulsions were also carried out during and following the 1967 war. An estimated 300,000 Palestinians left the West Bank during the Israeli invasion, with many becoming refugees a second time. An example of this is the complete removal of people in the Auja refugee camp near Jericho. But this was not the only destructive act perpetrated. All Palestinians who were outside the conquered areas in June 1967, whether for studies, business or visits were prevented from returning, and if they had property, it again fell to ownership for the Jewish people (via the JNF under absentee property laws).

The Hebrew weekly magazine Kol Ha’ir published a letter by the former Israeli Army General Shlomo Lahat, who was Commander of Eastern Jerusalem immediately after the occupation in 1967. In the letter to a Jerusalem council member, he wrote: “In the power of my authority as Military of Jerusalem, immediately after the city was liberated in 1967, I gave orders that Arab inhabitants be evacuated from the Western Wall area and from the Jewish quarter in the Old City. They were given, in agreement, alternative housing in Jerusalem and its environs.”28

Like all refugees, Palestinian refugees have an internationally recognized right to repatriation and compensation for their suffering. Article 13 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights reaffirms the right of every individual to leave and return to his country. The Fourth Geneva Convention is also very explicit in considering any forced migration or refusal to repatriate people displaced from their homes and lands as violations of basic rights. The refugees themselves have traditionally demanded repatriation and refused resettlement. In the early 1950s the Palestinian refugees themselves steadfastly held to the “right of return.” UN General Assembly Resolution 194 passed on December 11, 1948, was very clear on the right of Palestinian refugees. This was reaffirmed almost yearly by the General Assembly. The resolution states that “the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date.” The UN partition resolution 181 of November 29, 1947 that recommended formation of a Jewish state also forbade population transfer. In fact, Israel’s later admission to the UN was conditional on acceptance of relevant UN resolutions including 181 and 194.

Count Folke Bernadotte, former vice chairman of the Swedish Red Cross successfully challenged Himmler’s plan to deport 20,000 Swedish Jews to concentration camps during World War II. After WWII he was appointed Special U.N. Mediator to the Middle East. Bernadotte stated, “It would be an offence against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes, while Jewish immigrants flow into Palestine.”29

For this outspoken support of basic human rights, Zionists assassinated Bernadotte in Jerusalem September 17, 1948. The head of the Stern terrorist gang, Nathan Friedman-Yellin, was sentenced to five years imprisonment for the murder but was quickly pardoned and in 1950 was elected to the Israeli Knesset. In the same year, the Knesset introduced laws to ensure refugees are not allowed to return. A massive media campaign was then launched to ensure that the world did not get the real story about those unfortunate victims of war and repression. The words of Nathan Chofshi, 40 years ago, remain true today:

We came and turned the native Arabs into tragic refugees. And still we have to slander and malign them, to besmirch their name. Instead of being deeply ashamed of what we did and trying to undo some of the evil we committed...we justify our terrible acts and even attempt to glorify them.30

The refugees themselves believed that eventually they would return to their homes and villages in what became Israel and would live at peace with their neighbors. Here is how one refugee described his feelings:

Our struggle, as we have proved, has not been merely to live in comfort, to pursue happiness, to acquire purpose, to create, to sing, to make love; it has not been merely to enrich our culture, to contribute to civilization, to leave our imprint in history. But it has been a struggle for the right to do it in Palestine. In the past we were repeatedly offered, were we not, the choice of resettlement elsewhere. More than Palestine, Syria has an abundance of cultivable land to till; Lebanon has more beautiful hills to build on; Australia a more developed economy to benefit from; other parts of the world a more splendid red carpet to welcome us on. But we opted to wait for a return to our homeland, where we had lived, where we danced the dabke, played the oud, where the men wore their checkered hattas and the women their embroidered shirts, where the sun shone in the winter and the smell of oranges permeated the air and the soul.31

In one survey in the West Bank, 74.9% of refugees stated that the just solution must include return, 15.6% stated compensation and 6% stated compensation and return. As for an acceptable solution, 46.2% said return, 26.8% said compensation, and 18.2% stated improvement in status of the camps. This is in the West Bank; in Lebanon and Jordan, a higher percentage of people polled wanted to return to their homeland (surveys cited in Dr. Adel Samareh ‘Al-Lajioun Al-Falastinyoun: Haq al-awda wa istidkhal al-hazima29). Another survey showed that 98.7% of the refugees (93% of among all Palestinians) said they would not accept compensation as an alternative to return (the Israel ⁄ Palestine Center for Research and Information, August 2001, http:/ ⁄ www.ipcri.org). Again, a vast majority (96% to 2%) chose return to their homes and lands and not into the new Palestinian state. Almost 80% of the refugees lack faith in the ability of negotiations to produce positive results for them. Over 85% of the general refugee population would agree to return even if it meant living under Israeli sovereignty. Pessimism is higher among the older generation, with 60% believing that they will not return to their native lands, while in the general population among Palestinians only 23.7% believe they will not return.

Many of the refugees are camped either along, or within a short distance of, Israel’s borders in southern Lebanon, in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, creating a major “infiltration” problem for Israel. For instance, in the Gaza Strip, the population trebled from 80,000 in 1947 to nearly 240,000 at the end of the 1948 war. This created a massive humanitarian problem for tens of thousands of destitute refugees crowded into this small amount of land. In 1956, of the then 300,000 inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, 215,000 were listed as refugees, occupying eight vast camps. The Gaza Strip had nearly one-fourth of the total of about 900,000 refugees from historic Palestine, and has become the most densely populated area on earth.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/ref-qumsiyeh.html

The reasons they cannot return are complex but not basically the fault of israeli policies. Ongoing wars and enmity have made it difficult, also the mood and power within palestinian refugee camps and displaced groups has made it difficult for any to even seek return to Israel (a nd hard for Israel to accept such requests)

The original mandate of Isreal was much smaller than at present but its present size and the displacement of the arab inhabitants came about because the arabs lost the war and territory which they had initiated, expecting to easily crush israel.

Palestinians have been and will be killed if they make any attempt to return to Israel. By early 1955, between 2,700 to 5,000 Palestinian refugees had been blow up by Israeli mines or shot (the vast majority unarmed citizens.) Benny Morris, Border Wars, page 137. Benny Morris learned from Israeli archives that only 10% of these infiltration attempts by the refugees were politically motivated or involved sabotage - most clearly were attempts by destitute refugees to return home, harvest crops, recover livestock, or simply see their fields once more. :cry:

General Yigal Allon established "free fire zones" along the unmarked borders under which Palestinian refugees were to be "shot without interrogation". This shoot-to-kill policy began in 1948 at the end of the war til 1956.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're happy with the mass displacement of a people?

And Then, you and I disagree as much as we agree, but I've never actually thought of you as callous and cruel. He was kicked out of the land of his fathers because a third party (note - not God this time) gave that land to someone else. How is that fair? Now, if God had made it happen, had he inspired a new Moses to lead the Jews back to Israel, I'd be compassionate towards the displaced, but it's God's will, God wins. This iteration of Israel isn't God's will though, it hasn't been divinely inspired, the masses haven't been led back to their Promised Land by a Prophet. They're there, that's a fact. They'll stay there. that's also a fact. But they're also the aggressors as much as the Palestinians are. Noone is right. Everyone is going to lose unless both sides says "fine, today is the last day of missiles and bulldozers" and they try and build a tomorrow everyone can compromise to live in.

The Israelis have God on their side, they'll end up with all the Israel they are meant to have when God decides it's time for them to have it, not when they just want it.

And I don't consider myself callous OR cruel but you are entitled to your opinion and I respect it and you. I agree with what you say here - almost verbatim. The truth is I'm human and can get a little p***y when my chain gets yanked enough by folks like BJ and Yamato. It doesn't excuse my childishness on occasion but there it is. I do not know any Jews OR Palestinians. I have no doubt that my native compassion for people would cause me a lot of inner turmoil if I met and made a friend of a Palestinian. I am moved by the pictures of the children in Palestine and their poverty but I am also moved when I hear of the killing of Jewish children in random bombings. The land of Israel IS the home of the Jews. If they are an arrogant and mean spirited lot then they will pay for that both today and in the time to come because we both know that our God is just. My support of the people there is because I DO BELIEVE that this group of people are the final regathering of the diaspora. There are too many other signs to mistake this as anything other than the final days before Christ's return imo. My sympathy for the Palestinians is swallowed up by their refusal to attempt to make peace and to stop teaching their children to actively, vehemently hate a Jew just for being born a Jew. If this makes me a hateful person then I will accept that
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.