Wednesday, January 21, 2009

The Zionists: Philosophy of Fear and Hatred (Part I)

A Little Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing ~ Alexander Pope

Olmert's Speech

It came no surprise that Olmert's seize of fire justified Israel's butchery of 1200 Palestinians in the sense of the IDF defending the victims against terrorists. The timing of Olmert's 'unilateral' seize of fire was also perfect. He secured three goals through bloodshed:
• Making use of Bush's presence and unlimited support to Israel's atrocities till Bush's final moments
• Sending a signal to Obama that no one will obstruct Israel's bloody policies
• Making use of the International Media where all world attentions were focused on Obama's elections instead of the evidence of Israel's genocidal policies on the Palestinians after the media was more loose to wonder around Gaza.

This reflected on Obama's speech, where he mentioned global peace and hope, while not mentioning anything on Israel and Palestine, specially on the recent butcheries that took place. Luckily, U2 where there two days earlier to remind Obama on the Israeli/Palestinian question.

Fear of the Other: A Look at the Terrorists

Israel as always successfully integrated the fear of Palestinians. The nation of Israel is fully convinced that they live in the middle of an ocean of war mongrels of barbarians. The sporadic attacks of the Palestinians on the Israelis are depicted as terrorist attacks on a nation that wants to live peace. What the story is untold is the exact history on how Palestinians of 1948 were expelled from their homes, and the butcheries never stopped since that day. Almost on daily basis, Israelis are free to run, shoot randomly couple of Palestinians every day, and then argue that they were shot at. That was the case in 1948, and that is the case today. 9/11, where everyone assumes that the Arabs celebrate that day, was the greatest bad news for the Arabs. 9/11 brought the justification for Bush and Israel to do any activity they want in the name of "War of Terror" and open a full scale war under the banner of "Pre-Emptive Strikes".

Tarek Ali, in his book Bush in Babylon: The Recolonization of Iraq, divulges the primary reasons why Palestinians become militants. For these people are the terrorists that Israel is supposed to defend. This phenomenon is universal for the Israelis, bomb your victims to kingdom come, and drive them to join a militant group, which represents a liberation movement, and dub it terrorism.

" By making Ariel Sharon a co-leader in the 'war against terrorism', the regime in Washington consciously blurred the distinctions between national liberation and terror. The result has been catastrophic. Not a day passes without an email from Israel and Palestine informing me of the latest atrocity. The material on my computer would fill two large volumes if it were presented as evidence before a war crimes tribunal. One of these emails arrived on 9 July 2003 and is less typical because no young children were killed. It was sent to me by Palestinian Monitors:
In the early hours of this morning Israeli Special Forces and soldiers entered the West Bank town of Burkin, killing one man, seriously injuring his wife and arresting another Palestinian man. The Israeli army claims that they were fired upon when entering the village, so they returned fire, however according to Palestinian witnesses this is not true.

The Troops entered the village and went to the house next door to ours. My wife and I were sleeping on our roof when suddenly we heard some shots. We immediately entered our house. The shooting ended as soon as it began – only about four shots were fired. About 10 minutes later our door bell rang and it was Iyad and his wife. They had crawled to our front door, covered in blood and still bleeding. We called for an ambulance, and eventually it came. The medics said the soldiers had stopped them for only about 10 minutes.

We went over and spoke to Iyad's father to see what had happened and he told us the soldiers had entered his house and arrested his 20-year-old son Fadi. Iyad, his other son, and Khaloud, Iyad's wife, and their three children, were sleeping on a bed in the garden as it was too hot in their house. When the soldiers left after arresting Fadi they must have seen them and opened fire. There was no shooting from the Palestinians – just the Israelis. We saw the mattress where the couple had been sleeping and it too was covered with blood.

Iyad later died, according to the doctors at Rafidiya hospital in Nablus, from bullets to his throat and arms. Khaloud was shot in the face, and is currently in hospital in a critical but stable condition; their children, the eldest of whom is five years old, escaped uninjured.

With this going on every single day since 9/11 how can any thinking person be surprised that young kids are desperate to join one of the militant organizations resisting the Israelis. There is a purity and moral integrity in children that illuminates a struggle. A single hair on their head is worth more than all those who sit in judgement on them, let alone their killers. " (Tarek Ali, Bush in Babylon, Verso 2003 – Page 13 – 14)

Joe Sacco, during his visit to Palestine, quoted several Arab Jews arguing that Zionism came from Europe. The British mandate recorded several procedures of extortions of Zionists on local Palestinian Jews whereby the latter were forced to recruit Jewish labor and expel their own Palestinian Arab friends from their farms. The Ottomans' legacy also included tolerance and coexistence, which was more than comfortable for the World Zionist Organization to visit the Sultan and attempt to purchase Palestine. Of course, the final 9 years of the Ottoman empire changed radically when the nationalist Young Turks revolution took place. Bottom line, the policies of the Zionists, and their revisionist counterparts of Vladimir Japotinsky, stressed on expelling the expulsion of the local inhabitants of Palestine, and secure it to the Jewish nation. Hence, from their first moments of arrival to Palestine, their philosophy rotated around imposing the ethnic line. Suddenly, Palestinian Christians and Muslims suddenly found themselves gradually kicked out of their homes in Jerusalem, and elsewhere. Any Jew who didn't follow-up their program, the Zionists had all the means to extort and threaten the non-Zionist Jews.

King-Crane Commission and Lord Grey's Anti-Zionist Approach

As a revolutionary Marxist obliged to reconstruct history as it happened, we shall begin with the Zionist claims that Palestine was empty, The Zionists also had their cover-up in Europe. Supported by their vast network of contacts, and their advanced organization allowed them in World War I, the Zionists were able to receive offers from both, the Germans and the British, in regards to Palestine. Eventually, their socialist infrastructure allowed them to organize themselves better than the Palestinians who just immerged from the Ottoman dominion and jumped into British brutal rule and biased support to the Jews. As riots started to spring in the early 1920s and climaxed in 1929, the Zionists' propaganda was in jeopardy, Palestine was not an empty desert. Nevertheless the King-Crane commission proved the British wrong, sadly their advices were not listened to, and it meant that the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians would begin shortly after the Versailles treaties. The report and statistics of the Commission were as follows (after visiting Palestine in 1919):

Out of 260 petitions in Palestine:

For Complete Zionist Program: 7 Petitions (2.7%)
Modified Zionist Program: 8 Petitions (3%)
Against the Zionist Program: 222 Petitions (85.3%)

The recommendations of the Commission actually warned against the implementation of the Zionist Program, which was facilitated by Lord Balfour, by saying:

'For a national home for the Jewish people is not equivalent to making Palestine into a Jewish State, nor can the erection of such a Jewish State be accompanied without the gravest trespass upon the "civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.'

The Commission also accused Zionism of breaching the very concept of Woodrow Wilson's 'Right for Self-Determination', and warned against the implementation of the Zionist Program, whereby they argued:

"If that principle is to rule [US President Woodrow Wilson's Self-Determination], and so the wishes of Palestine's population are to be decisive as to what is to be done with Palestine, then it is to be remembered that the non-Jewish population of Palestine – nearly nine-tenths of the whole – are emphatically against the entire Zionist program. The tables show that there was no one thing upon which the population of Palestine were more agreed on this." (in regards to the numbers given above)To subject a people so minded to unlimited Jewish immigration, and to steady financial and social pressure to surrender the land, would be a gross violation of the principle just quoted (Wilson's Self-Determination), and of the people's rights, though it kept within the forms of law.

They summed the demands of the Palestinians as follows:

"We oppose the pretentions of the Zionists to create a Jewish commonwealth in the southern part of Syria, known as Palestine, and oppose Zionist migration to any part of our country for we do not acknowledge their title, but consider them a grave peril to our people from the national, economical, and political points of view..."

The Commission recommended that the Zionist program be reduced drastically, : " In view of these considerations, and with a deep sense of sympathy for the Jewish cause, the Commissioners feel bound to recommend that only a greatly reduced Zionist program be attempted by the Peace Conference, and even that, only very gradually initiated. This would have to mean that Jewish immigration should be definitely limited, and that the project for making Palestine a Jewish commonwealth should be given up."

In Parallel, Sir Edward Grey, who was Foreign Secretary of the British Empire from 10905 – 1916, exploded in the House of the Lords in regards to the Balfour Declaration: "It promised a Zionist home without prejudice to the civil and religious rights of the population of Palestine. A Zionist home, my Lords, undoubtedly means or implies a Zionist Government over the district in which the home is placed, and 93 per cent of the population of Palestine are Arabs, I do not see how you can establish other than an Arab Government, without prejudice to their civil rights."

And prejudice was the correct term but the application was ethnic cleansing. The British mandate played a massive role in giving the Zionist Jews the right mechanisms.

Lt. – Col. W. F. Stirling, British Army Officer and Chief Staff Officer under T.E. Lawrence as well as ex-governer of Jaffa/Yafa) gave important testimonies on the riots that broke up that year in Jaffa (called in Arabic Yafa). In reaction of Jewish colonies expanding by that year, riots broke up between the Arabs and Jews:

"The [Balfour] declaration, however, coupled with the attitude of the Jews, caused the Arabs to fear an eventual Jewish domination; for while in stated that the British Government favoured the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine, the Jewish interpretation of it, which was openly preached, suggested that we favored the conversion of the whole country into a national home for them. The Arabs, not unnaturally, took alarm. Poor an dinexperienced, they saw little chance of competing against their rivals, who were rich and clever, and who were also, as it seemed, being supported by the powerful British Government."

Riots broke out, while the government ordered that Hebrew, English, and Arabic to be used, the Zionist section refused to use the Arabic words. It is, in their nature, to divide the population as Jewish and non-Jewish. "Atrocities were committed by both sides, and some Arab women lying wounded in the fields were seen to have their breasts scythed off by Jewish colonists."

A final quote I will borrow from Stirling is on the ethnic character of Zionism. Most of the Jews were not Zionists, they regarded their fellow Christian and Muslim friends as colleagues. As I always mentioned, Zionism is the greatest bad news for Judaism. It is not recent that we saw the Orthodox Jews opposed Zionism. Zionism despised equality of the inhabitants of Palestine, and imposed this racial segregation:

"In the early days there were many Jews in Palestine who were not Zionists, but the pressure applied by the Jewish Agency became so great, and its Gestapo methods so severe, that few Jews dared openly express any other faith. Just before I left Jaffa a very important Jewish farmer from Richon-le-Zion sent a message asking if he could come and see me. I accordingly invited him to come to my office the following morning, but he refused to do that and asked for an appointment at my house after dark.

When he arrived he told me he had come to ask for my advice on a personal problem. He explained how, as a small boy, he had been brought to Palestine by his father, one of the biggest landowners of his village. Growing up there, he had made numerous friends among the little Arab boys of his own age. On his father's death he had taken over the property and naturally continued to employ his boyhood friends as herdsmen, ploughmen and teamsters. That morning, however, the Jewish Agency had ordered him to dismiss all his Arab employees and to engage some newly arrived Jewish immigrants at a wage-rate far excess of the pay of his Arab workmen. What should he do? If he dismissed the Arabs in the summary manner suggested, such bad feeling would be created, being a vindictive people, they might well burn his crops. Apart from this consideration, they also happened to be his friends. The Jews who had been proposed to him as labourers knew nothing about farming, and certainly nothing about the local conditions. The Arabs would work to all hours of the night if it were a question of getting a crop in before the rain; the Jews would down tools precisely at six o'clock, no matter what the weather. He now saw no possibility of working his land on economic lines, and he would inevitably go bankrupt." (Walid Khalidi, From Haven to Conquest, P. 219 – 237).

In his notebook, C.R. Ashbee (British Architect, Civic Adviser to the Palestine Administration), wrote:

"There is then the effort of clearing up and rebuilding a country, and the city of Jerusalem – for here the part is always greater than the whole – a country which to all men has a strange unreal sanctity. Palestine for most of us was an emotion rather than a reality."

"There was next the half-generous, wholly ignorant impulse, that this, as we English thought, empty land, this no man's land, this land lost to us when were last there in the days Edward Longshanks, might as we had now conquered it of the Turk be tossed to the Jews. So we thought."

"There was then – and here came the rub – a certain chivalrous reaction, and it came with greater knowledge. This country, it appeared, belonged after all to other people and they, too, had helped us win the war [WWI]. Who were these other people? What right had we to mortgage their inheritance? Might it not be a breach of trust? We have recently begun to find out the truth, to answer some of these troublesome questions."

The greater knowledge, clinging round the word "self-determination," came as an eye-opener. It showed us two things: first, that we were after all, as far as Palestine was concerned, only a part of Christendom; Greek, Italian, French, German, Russian, also had a share in the Holy Land, perhaps a greater share than we, even as St. Bernard, St. Francis, and St. Louis did more for Palestine, and meant more for the world, than Richard Coeur-de-Lion or Edward Longshanks. It showed us next there were also the Arab and the Moslem to be reckoned with, him to whom the Holy Land actually belonged , to whom the Holdy Land was equally holy, and whose record and achievement it – Amr, Abdul Malek, Al-Mamun , Saladin , Kalaoun , Kait Bey – were far greater than ours. We were learning a little history. "

Next Chapter: Roots for Zionist Tactic of the Modern Day


Anonymous said...

It is interested very much.
Please link to this site.

Renegade Eye said...

When you hold even the meager reigns of state power like Hamas, you are not terrorist. Hamas is the state in Gaza. Hamas may be belligerant, not terrorist.

I agree with Alan Woods, that Palestine needs a great general. It's cruel and Orwellian, that after the massacre, Hamas and even PFLP is calling it a victory. Maybe Hamas got more respect, but to be so oblivious to the reality, is boasting. If you don't start analysis with actual data, you're screwed.

Could you imagine Bin Laden saying 9-11 was to change the US's civilian population towards Islamism? This idea that bombing civilians will change them, has to be debunked. A good pacifist task.

Handala said...

Renegade, sorry friend but you're really starting to piss me off.

Hamas rockets are not launched to change the israeli population mind, its trying to say: "as long as you are occupying our lands, you'll always be under attack and you'll never be safe anywhere so get the fuck out"

And could you explain to me whats orwellian about hamas claiming victory, you just said in a previous comment that that hamas has to do is survive this attacked to be a winner, you're own words.

Some times i feel that you're "in the closet" pro-israel and just need to come out

Sorry my friend but i have to be honest with you


Renegade Eye said...

Handala: long as you are occupying our lands, you'll always be under attack and you'll never be safe anywhere so get the fuck out"

That shows Palestine needs good generals. That tactic gives Zionism an excuse to do anything it wants. Shooting rockets that don't hit anything, is not how governments are overthrown. In addition conveniently Hamas is firing at the poorest and working class Jews. They are not firing into Tel Aviv suburbs.

Unlike Lebanon where Israel said it was going to conquer Hezbollah, this time they made no such boast. My previous comment was wrong. Still it's only a force that doesn't care how many civilians are killed or injured could claim victory. Think about what you are saying. Can you in good conscience call that a victory for Palestine.

Neither Hamas or Fatah, have ever denounced neoliberalism. If they ruled a Palestinian state, it would be the supplier of cheap labor for Israel.

I don't care about a one state, two state or ten state solution. There can be no justice, equality or self determination, as long as there's capitalism.

In the short run, the best scenario:
1) Form Palestinian and Israeli together revolutionary organizations.
2) Socialism in Egypt would be great. The border with Gaza could be opened.

I expect Iran to sell out Hamas. Iran and the US will be making deals like crazy very soon.

National solutions are so out of date. Take Tibet. Are you for them being part of China? Independent? Autonomous? My answer is whatever they want, as long as minority Chinese are not oppressed. The Chinese bureaucracy needs to be overthrown first. You have a world capitalist economy. That makes national liberation impossible under capitalism.

For a Socialist Federation of the Middle East

Anonymous said...

Handala - that's a load of BS.
shooting rockets at civilians bombing their buses while Phatakh is doing a peace negations, adopting the bloodiest of Islamic ideology, contracting a fascist regime based on militant bruit force ...thats not saying ""as long as you are occupying our lands, you'll always be under attack and you'll never be safe anywhere so get the fuck out""
that's just saying i prefer to live on the sword. this approach derives from the simple fact that with out an Israeli opponent the Palatine people (and all Arabs) would start noticing how bad their ruling regimes are doing.

Renegade Eye said...

Anonymous: It's not that simple.

Hamas has reactionary goals. Your view doesn't take account their flexibility in tactics.

Their tactics reflect they want a deal with Israel, just like Fatah has.

You are right about the Arab regimes. Egypt has a tremendous security apparatus, that has to be smashed.

Handala: Hamas shouldn't shoot rockets, into its old neighborhood.

Why doesn't Hamas arm the working class? Every factory, school and neighborhood. The answer is because it is not fighting a revolutionary war. It's only fighting for a piece of the two state settlement imperialism wants.

Alan Woods said: m the public declarations of some of the Hamas leaders it is obvious that they hope that Palestinian suffering would rouse the world's conscience and rally fellow Muslims to their side. In this they have succeeded. But if they imagined that this would be sufficient to force Israel to back down, they were sadly mistaken. Once they started the offensive, there was no going back for Israel, no matter how many demonstrations are held or how many EU missions are dispatched.

Later he says: Those who consider that the people of Israel are one solid reactionary mass understand nothing. If this were the case, then the future of the Palestinians would be hopeless indeed. But it is not true. On more than one occasion the masses in Israel have demonstrated against the brutality of their own imperialists and in solidarity with the Palestinians. Even in this conflict we had the first signs of protest in the recent anti-war demonstration in Tel Aviv. On more then one occasion the Israeli workers have organized strikes and general strikes. The class struggle exists in Israel as in any other country. What is necessary is to intensify it and cut the ground from under the feet of the reactionary Zionists.

A region wide uprising is imperialism's biggest fear. That is why they constantly plea for ceasefires.

Israel in sense doesn't win either. After 1967 the Palestinian Authority was formed, after 1982 Hezbollah grew.

Autonomy for Arabs, Jews and Kurds can only be won on a socialist framework.

Moussa Bashir said...

MFL: good reading your work, as always.

Hanzala said...

Great Article!
i would also recommend the great work of Edward Said "the question of Palestine".
It is useful to note that the zionist project came in the context of european nationalism, and yes they saw Palestine as a Land without people, or at least with only arab nomads with no identity whatsoever. they reshaped the land, destroyed villages in order to erase any trace of cultural existence of Palestinians.
I would also recommend reading the paper by Sari Hanafi: "Spacio-cide: Colonial politics, invisibility and rezoning in Palestinian territory"
Where he talks abt the colonial politics of Israel, and how it is conducting a spacio-cide, i.e. the killing of the palestinian landscape through its wars by destroying public sapces and property. And also the Wall constructed which only aim is to make the Palestinians disappear, invisible to the Israeli eye, which is another way of denying their existence...
I will conclude by an Israeli joke: one day an israeli grand father says to his grand-son: boy, you see this house, i have constructed it when i was a young, also i have planted this tree, and i have cultivated this land. The child was surprised and says to his grand father: Grand father, when you were young, were you an Arab??


Sydney said...

That's Excellent Article!I would also recommend the great work of Edward Said "the question of Palestine". It is useful to note that the zionist project came in the context of european nationalism, and yes they saw Palestine as a Land without people, or at least with only arab nomads with no identity whatsoever. they reshaped the land, destroyed villages in order to erase any trace of cultural existence of Palestinians. I look forward to reading more!
Drug Intervention

amy said...

Your blog was really awesome! I just felt like reading it again and again. Here the greater knowledge, clinging round the word "self-determination," came as an eye-opener. It is very true that if there is self determination is present in oneself there is nothing impossible for that person in this world.

Amy Cooper
Drug Intervention Florida

MarxistFromLebanon said...

Anonymous : You mean it is ok to kill all the victims of the Gaza because couple fired backward rockets? IE you justify ethnic cleansing? (pethatic)

I promise to continue this article