Netanyahu Goes To War With The World

I did not characterize the election of Hamas as a forceful incident. Executing your own people and shooting rockets and mortar fire into Israel is an act of war and a very clear statement they wanted nothing to do with the peace process.

 

The Palestinians have good records and documentation that demonstrate they have lived on and farmed that land for at least 1500 years. The had olive groves, citrus orchards, and all sorts of veggie farms. The had beautiful towns. They lived in peace, Muslims, Christians, Turks, Armenians, Coptic, and others. Palestine was administered by the Ottoman Turks for hundreds of years. The Turks kept good home ownership records for that land. The one thing Palestinians were not was "Nomadic."

 

From the early stages of Zionism to the present, Zionists have propagated the myth that the most important land-bridge in human history (Palestine) has been empty and destitute for two thousand year until it was later developed by the Israeli Jews. As it will be proven below based on British Mandatory statistical books and other sources, this myth about Palestine and its indigenous people was concocted to romanticize the "Jewish return and redemption of the Promised Land". Soon you shall find that what was destitute in 1948 is still destitute, which is a fact that can be easily proven by using Google's Satellite view. Let's get a detailed accounting of the agricultural production in Palestine for the season of 1944-1945, we will directly quote the British Mandate (who prepared two volume books, titled Survey of Palestine, for the United Nations in 1946-7) as follows:

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story665.html

 

You said that in 2007 Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip by force. The election was in 2006. Gazan's said they voted for Hamas because of corruption within Fatah. So, who was offering opposition to which Hamas responded with force?

 

Killing your own people and then firing rockets into Israel is taking it by force whether you were duly elected or not.

 

Here is something I hope will clear up your misunderstanding concerning the event you are referring to:

Vanity Fair reported that it has “obtained confidential documents, since corroborated by sources in the US and Palestine, which lay bare a covert initiative, approved by Bush and implemented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams to provoke a Palestinian civil war.” The magazine adds that the plan “was for forces led by Dahlan, and armed with new weapons supplied at America’s behest, to give Fatah the muscle it needed to remove the democratically-elected Hamas-led government from power.”

But the secret plan backfired, resulting in a further setback for American foreign policy under Bush. Instead of driving its enemies out of power, the U.S.-backed Fatah fighters inadvertently provoked Hamas to seize total control of Gaza.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/04/gaza200804

Think that had anything to do with what you're talking about?
__________________________________________________________________________________

But we should get back to the issue of Israel's theft of Palestinian land. I think this is where we left off:

But as far as the root cause of the conflict, I think it can be best explained by Ben-Gurion when he told Nahum Goldmann, president of the World Jewish Congress:

If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"

Source: Nahum Goldmann, The Jewish Paradox, trans. Steve Cox (Grosset and Dunlap, 1978), p. 99.

Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the founding father of the Israeli right, made essentially the same point when he wrote: "Colonization is self-explanatory and what it implies is fully understood by every sensible Jew and Arab. There can only be one purpose in colonization. For the country's Arabs that purpose is essentially unacceptable. This is a natural reaction and nothing will change it."

Source: Quoted in Ian Lustick, "To Build and To Be Built By: Israel and the Hidden Logic of the Iron Wall," Israel Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Spring 1996), p. 200.
_________________________________________________________________________________

They didn't deny the theft. They just honestly believed that they could use the Bible as a land deed, and that that land deed trumped even justice and morality.

 

You are repeating yourself and merely arguing morality when it's obvious morality has little to do with political reality. The US did the same thing with taking the land from Mexico and when we violated every treaty we ever made with the Native Americans and they took it to the supreme court repeatedly the justices just laughed at them. The Palestinians killing their own people and firing rockets into Israel, whether justified or not, does not support their cause and only maintains the usual Hatfields and McCoys farce that makes the rest of the world look the other way. The same with the UN complaining about the situation and doing almost nothing. No matter how tempting it might be to just attack your enemy at every opportunity every war has to be fought using at least a modest degree of intelligence and planning.

Here in the US today, people are executing cops in broad daylight and rioting in the streets. That won't solve the problem and will only ensure that, eventually, in places like Chicago the only cops you will find are all crooked because the problem, to begin with, is that you get the justice you can afford and Chicago can't afford any. If the Palestinians insist on going down that road they can look forward to at least another hundred years of fighting with no end in sight. Isaac Asimov once wrote, "Fighting is the last resort of the incompetent" and, I would add, we are all incompetent sometimes, but the trick is learning how to limit how often. It was Gandhi who said, "An eye for an eye merely leaves everyone blind."

 

If I'm repeating myself, it's because you fail to answer my points. For example, when confronted with the fact that Israel's theft of Palestinian territory is happening today, you refer me to the U.S.'s violation of Mexico despite the fact that the U.S. is not involved In the continual theft of Mexican territory today. And even if it was, how does that justify Israel's theft of Palestinian territory today? Also, an occupied people have a right to resist the occupying force. That has always been the case.

And when confronted with this:

Vanity Fair reported that it has “obtained confidential documents, since corroborated by sources in the US and Palestine, which lay bare a covert initiative, approved by Bush and implemented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams to provoke a Palestinian civil war.” The magazine adds that the plan “was for forces led by Dahlan, and armed with new weapons supplied at America’s behest, to give Fatah the muscle it needed to remove the democratically-elected Hamas-led government from power.”

But the secret plan backfired, resulting in a further setback for American foreign policy under Bush. Instead of driving its enemies out of power, the U.S.-backed Fatah fighters inadvertently provoked Hamas to seize total control of Gaza . . .

​​. . . you maintain your misguided point, stating that the Palestinians killed their own people. You need to explain just what that has to do with the U.S. arming Fatah to overthrow the government of Hamas, and Hamas beating them anyway.
_____________________________________________________________________

And getting back to the root cause of the conflict, I think it can be best explained by Ben-Gurion when he told Nahum Goldmann, president of the World Jewish Congress:

If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"

Source: Nahum Goldmann, The Jewish Paradox, trans. Steve Cox (Grosset and Dunlap, 1978), p. 99.

Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the founding father of the Israeli right, made essentially the same point when he wrote: "Colonization is self-explanatory and what it implies is fully understood by every sensible Jew and Arab. There can only be one purpose in colonization. For the country's Arabs that purpose is essentially unacceptable. This is a natural reaction and nothing will change it."

Source: Quoted in Ian Lustick, "To Build and To Be Built By: Israel and the Hidden Logic of the Iron Wall," Israel Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Spring 1996), p. 200.
_________________________________________________________________________________

They didn't deny the theft. They acknowledged what had been done to the Palestinians. They just honestly believed that they could use the Bible as a land deed, and that that land deed trumped even justice and morality.

 

Only people who buy into all the propaganda of how "civilized" we have become and how much "progress" we have made tend to be shocked to learn it's all bullshit and outraged that it is still occurring and refuse to accept the reality of the situation that nobody is actually listening to a word they have to say. We just elected a man president of the most powerful country in the world who contradicts everything that comes out of his own mouth! If you think being outraged or making logical arguments or protesting, ranting, and raving is going to make a difference you are sadly mistaken. Nor will random violence which only contributes to the same politics as usual because, while the lights might be on, nobody is home and money is doing all the driving at the point of a gun.

 

Well, when this subject comes up, I'll always point out the hypocrisy of the oppressors and the hypocrisy of those who support the oppressors. I'll also point out the apathetic position of those who disapprove of those points being made.

 

Being realistic about the situation is not being apathetic. This is the same kind of crap I get from militant atheists all the time who equate being agnostic with being a lazy coward. It is the mentality of might makes right which supports exactly the kind of thing going on between Israel and the Palestinians. If all you care about is fighting the good fight its best to know who you are fighting for first.

 

Okay, so now you've stated your position on the matter. Nothing will ever change, therefore stating the facts is futile. Then I assume you have no intentions of refuting any of the points I've made concerning Israel's continual theft of Palestinian territory, or past U.S. efforts to arm Fatah for the purpose of overturning the Palestinian's democratic election.

So, having stated your position, is there anything you would wish to add?

 

Nothing will ever change so long as both sides take the view that might makes right. People can rant and rave about justice and every country in the world (including Israel itself!) can sign a UN declaration declaring the occupation of the land illegal or a war crime, but if nobody does anything all it proves is might makes right because their words don't mean a damned thing and are merely more weapons in the ongoing fight. If might makes right then there is no justice in or out of court and the courts have just become another weapon in Neverending Armageddon.

If war is the ongoing act of violence then peace is ongoing efforts to stop the violence without using violence.

 

Nothing will ever change as long as the root cause of the conflict is not addressed and remedied. And the root cause is best explained by Ben-Gurion when he told Nahum Goldmann, president of the World Jewish Congres

If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"

Source: Nahum Goldmann, The Jewish Paradox, trans. Steve Cox (Grosset and Dunlap, 1978), p. 99.

Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the founding father of the Israeli right, made essentially the same point when he wrote: "Colonization is self-explanatory and what it implies is fully understood by every sensible Jew and Arab. There can only be one purpose in colonization. For the country's Arabs that purpose is essentially unacceptable. This is a natural reaction and nothing will change it."

Source: Quoted in Ian Lustick, "To Build and To Be Built By: Israel and the Hidden Logic of the Iron Wall," Israel Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Spring 1996), p. 200.

 

Correct. In this case, Israel is the might. My problem is with people who try to vilify the Palestinians for exercising their right to resist the occupation, and then use that legal resistance as a way to justify Israel's illegal theft of Palestinian territory.

 

Gandhi resisted occupation by the British, but he did not have to resort to violence. If violence is the only means with which the Palestinians can resist the occupation then they have already lost for violence rules the world only when we cannot see a way to peace.

 

So even though Israel is stealing land from the Palestinians, and Palestinians have a legal right to resist occupation, you want to pull out Gandhi as the standard by which to judge the legal and legitimate response of the victims of land theft. I see.

If I were in your house and systematically cordoning off areas and then bringing in my family one by one, I wonder how Gandhi-like you would be. I'm thinking . . . not very!

 

Legitimacy is a legal term and, obviously, the law is not very helpful in this case or there would be little to discuss.

Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Mother Jones, etc. the list goes on and on of modern day heroes who found peaceful ways to promote justice. War might require supermen, but peace merely requires heart which is something in short supply these days.

I am a wandering Taoist and have no home or real possessions because I write the book that can never be written. For Taoists, violence has its place, but we recognize it as the last resort of the incompetent and see any use of violence on our part as reflecting our own incompetence rather than pushing the blame around for what comes around goes around and around and around as everyone in the middle east can testify to.

 

And do you think for the average Palestine citizen who has resorted to violence against Israelic occupation that they think that much different about violence? Don't you think many of them also see it as a last resort? Who is pushing blame around exactly? Isn't it clear where this conflict started (and no, it did not start centuries ago).

 

It is so good that you have no land which can be stolen from you, or a house that can be demolished in front of you and your family, or olive groves that can be razed. I therefore suggest that your advice to those being robbed and dispossessed is meaningless. You should be directing your words of wisdom to the Israelis, as they are in much greater need of them than their victims.

Here is what peaceful protest will buy you in Palestine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qY92YOlvS4