Wel-Met Camps Memories Forums  

Go Back   Wel-Met Camps Memories Forums > The Sunday Forum
Memories Forum Home Quick User Guide Register Wel-Met Photos Find Other Members Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-27-2006, 12:32 AM   #1
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
Arab-Israel conflict

Hi All-

I was registered to use this web-site three years ago, when I posted some song lyrics- a couple of my collaborations with Donald Kreis, which are familiar to all the Wel-Metters of our era, but have not posted since. Then I heard from Ron Rudolph who said that he had heard that there had been some political controversy in the postings, checked it out, and was surprised that I wasn't involved. (It seems I have expressed some opinions in the last few years that have recevied mixed reviews from my Wel-Met friends.) Took me a few months to get around to it, but got on the site, and looked for this political controversy. Found none. All I found was a few guys sharing in the finer points of self-deception with regard to the Arab-Israel conflict.

Of course that self-deception makes this web-site complete as far as a true expression of the Wel-Met experience goes. A big part of the Wel-Met big-chill, in addition to all the activities and comaraderie and friendship and personal growth that that made the experience and that we remember fondly, was some basic assumptions that we made about each others' political views. We all hated Nixon and the war in Vietnam. We all hated the Arabs because, well, they hated us first, right? And we loved Israel. I can remember going to the huge protest at the UN in 1974 to protest Arafat's speaking appearance there. I don't remember if I went with Wel-Met chums or just happened to bump into them there- I was president of a Zionist youth group at the time, so it could have been I went with them. Anyway, it was an experience I shared with Wel-Met pals. We went because we felt that an Arab terrorist should not be speaking at the UN, and we were in the company of many thousands who agreed with us. Nobody had told us at the time that most of the Israeli government is composed of Jewish terrorists, today of course, but it was at that time as well. So there was a fundmental double standard there that we just were not aware of.

It was depressing for me to see the various posts on the conflict, which began with Brett's piece with a dozen or more "points" with regard to the conflict. I shouldn't say it wasn't expected. I know how most Jews feel about the situation, and I know how I was raised- what I was taught- and what I believe for most of my life. I don't personally know you guys who posted this stuff, but it seems to me you're probably highly educated, probably making good money in your fields- you're probably achievers. Why is it that you assume that the things you've heard all your life are true just because you've heard them, and just because you find them on some list that some idiot is spreading around the internet? Why don't you pick up a book? Or at least speak to people who know the situation first hand- from both sides? Maybe you don't know where you can actually find a Palestinian- but not to worry- having been forcibly removed from their land en masse, they're all over the place!

Here's what I'm getting at- and it's for you people with advanced degrees: An entire generation of Jewish Israeli historians has been writing telling us that what we have been told about Israel is wrong, and that the Arab version of events is correct, and they use de-classified IDF and other government documents to prove it. You may find this hard to believe, but it's true. And here's what's even more remarkable about it: You can claim that there are a few mumzers in every generation (like me!) and so it's probably some traitor Arab-lover who wrote that trash. No. There's just too many of them. And, while they all essentially agree on the history, they actually don't come to the same moral conclusion. Take two guys: Ilan Pappe and Benny Morris. They are both in agreement that the state of Israel was founded on massacre, rape, forced expulsion, and campaigns of fear against the Arabs, but Ilan Pappe does what is, for me, the logical and moral thing. He promotes the pro-Palestinian narrative. Benny Morris, like a true neo-Nazi, says too bad we didn't finish the job and advocates a completion of the ethnic cleansing of the Arabs. Go figure!

I don't want to go through all the ridiculous points on that piece that Brett posted, but just a smattering:

The continuous Jewish presence in Palestine was under 5% in pre-Zionism days, and most of them were Arab-speaking Arab Jews who, when the Zionists began their take-over of the land, were completely against it. Don't use an Anti-Zionist population to justify Zionism.

The 2,000 year old claim to real estate is completely ridiculous. If every group in the world that feels slighted by history were to invade and conquer land based on ancient claims the whole world would be in total and utter chaos. We Wel-Metters who are American Jews live on land stolen from Native Americans. If they were to come to your house and claim it- take it from you without any reparations- based on a 350 year old claim, you would find that completely outrageous, and yet that's exactly what happend to the Palestinians based on the Jews' 2,000 year old claim, and we defend this!

The claim that in 1948 the Arabs all left voluntarily, having been given orders by radio broadcasts from Arab leaders to do so while they pushed the Jews into the sea, is a myth. Records were may of all broadcasts, all records have been researched, and no such orders were made. In fact there were broadcast orders telling people to return to their homes if they had fled. Some Arabs did flee, which is a pretty logical thing to do when you know you will be in a war zone if you don't. By international law they have the right to return home, a right which has been deprived them and all the other refugees and their descendants for 58 years. Most of those who became refugees became so as the result of direct military action, and this is very well documented.

So why the myths? Simple. Zionism wanted it that way. For example Ben Gurion gave direct orders to expel Arabs from any number of locations in 1948, but he never did so in writing. The problem is that some of the guys he gave those orders to didn't keep quiet about it. One guy actually disobeyed his orders. A Canadian named Dunkelman who oversaw the conquest of Nazareth refused a direct order from Ben Gurion to expel the Arab population of that town, and he wouldn't do it- felt it was immoral. And then years later he talked about it- betraying his leader! Speaking of immoral! But Dunkleman is the reason that Nazareth's population was left intact while, for example, the entire populations of Ramleh and Lydda (now Lod, where the airport is) were expelled by the IDF following Ben Gurion's orders.

Lot's more to say but I'm done for now. I registered in such a way that my e mail address won't show. This is because I don't want people taking pot-shots at me, which, in my experience, people who feel passionately about this subject sometimes will do. So anyone who responds will have to do so in this forum where anyone can read it. And for anyone who asks I'll send a list of books and other materials I have in my personal library, which is pretty extensive, and I can make recommendations for anyone who would like to update their awareness of the situation from myth to reality. And- for anyone who wishes- I'll go point to point with you. Post your objection to what I wrote- I'll check here from time to time.

To close with a current news item: You all may or may not know that the insane Orthodox settlers on the West Bank (no I will not call it Judea and Samaria) have descended to some form of lower primate, harrassing and often injuring and killing Arabs who- imagine the audacity- want to harvest crops or walk to school. International human rights workers have been working in the area protesting them, for example accompanying kids on their way to and from school, to shield them from these idiots. Last week, the Jewish settler community in Hebron was harassing a few internationals- including a 19 year old Swedish woman- who were protecting some Arab kids. They were spitting on them and shouting "We killed Jesus, we'll kill you, too!" One of the settlers smashed a bottle across the face of this Swedish woman, breaking her cheek-bone and eye socket. OK- we've always known the Orthodox are crazy, right? I mean, they never liked us- called us "Goyim" because we don't have pais, right? And we're not Goyim, right? But we let it be because we felt they were basically harmless. But now look at what they're doing. Look at what we're helping them to do, what the United States is helping them to do with $15 million per day in aid to Israel. Look at what we're supporting!

Don't doubt that I'm a real Wel-Met alum. 1972 unit 5 Barryville, 1973 Pioneers Barryvile, 1974 Western Trip.

Free Palestine!

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 11:28 AM   #2
Michael Ohlstein
Registered User
 
Michael Ohlstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Old Brookville, NY
Posts: 199
There are two things here with which I find myself in agreement.

Israel was founded on massacre, rape, forced expulsion, and campaigns of fear....

and

The 2,000 year old claim to real estate is completely ridiculous. If every group in the world that feels slighted by history were to invade and conquer land based on ancient claims the whole world would be in total and utter chaos.


Except that on the first point, it was those things that were being perpetrated against European Jews, and on the second point, so too is a 60 year old claim to real estate completely ridiculous. It isn't the amount of time that passes that makes a land claim any more or less valid.

Maps are drawn by people with pencils. Borders are drawn by people with guns. The Palestinians know this, which is why they want more guns..... And in case you haven't noticed, the world IS in utter chaos.

I don't think of myself as a Zionist (or Zionist apologist) any more than you think of yourself as a self loathing Jew (I'm guessing), but I don't hear any constructive suggestions...... Got any?
Michael Ohlstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 12:21 PM   #3
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
suggestions

Thanks for a much more civilized response than I was expecting- although it's certainly possible that worse is to come! I attend demonstrations against Israel and in support of the Palestinians and the Lebanese, at which I identify myself as an Anti-Zionist Jew on my sign, so I've been spat on and cursed out quite a lot.

I have three suggestions, one for Israel and two for the United States- in reverse order:

1) The United States has to cease being imperialist- which is a general statement- and will be difficult to implement since we have been imperialist since the days of westward expansion and "manifest destiny". But what that means in practical terms today is mainly one thing: get out of Iraq immediately. How is this relevant to Israel/Palestine? Here's how: Do you believe that we're not in Iraq because of Israel? All Zionist extremist parties/individuals in Israel and in our Zionist-occupied government were calling for an invasion of Iraq, including but not limited to Sharon, Wolfowitz, and Feith (those two were part of the decision making apparatus at the Pentagon, and it's clear where they're loyalties lie!), AIPAC and all the pro-Israel lobbies. The goal of Iraq was to get rid of Israel's biggest threat in the area, Saddam Hussein, and put in a pro-USA pro-Zionist puppet government. That obviously failed. An additional up-side sought after was a friendly buffer that did not come to pass located between Israel and Iran, and Iran is obviously another threat to Israel. I'm not saying that Israel is the ONLY reason we're in Iraq, there is also oil and other corporate interest and Cowboy Bush's personal vendetta, but it is either a significant reason or the majority reason. Getting out of Iraq would show the world that the USA is at least willing to admit defeat and back down, and would show Israel that we're not willing to start WW lll for them. (Additionally it would be very nice if we could change our policies towards Iran, N. Korea, Colombia, Venezuela, etc. and dismantle all of our over-seas military bases, various installations, and covert CIA projects.)

2) Actually part of number one, but very specific: We need to immediately cease and desist sending Israel $15 million per day. And we need to come up with a much smaller number for aid to Israel, and make that amount of aid contingent upon Israel's total withdrawal from all territories occupied in 1967. This has worked before, with much less money at stake, when after the '56 war we "encouraged" Israel to get out of the Sinai. (OK and then they conquered it again- but it worked for a minute!)

3) Israel has to immediately halt construction of the apartheid-separation wall, immediately halt all construction of new settlements in the territories, and immediately begin a program of depopulating all the settlements which exist, moving all of the settlers behind the green line, with just compensation, because, after all, it was the Israeli government that gave them incentives to live there in the first place. Then it has to immediately live up to its obligation under UN Resolution 194 (and dozens of re-affirmations of same!) and invite the refugees to come home to whatever location they originated at in Israel proper, or whatever location they desire in the territories- including the Israeli-built country club-suburbs on the West Bank. Additionally they need to compensate all refugees for losses, both those who desire to return, and those who don't. This will be expensive and the international community will be more than happy to oblige with assistance in order to avert WW lll. AND, here's the big one: Israel has to end its program of open immigration to the Jews of the world by which I, born in the state of Illinois to a mother born in New York- down the line to Belarus- with no connection to Israel, can freely immigrate there while my friend Haithem who was born in Ramallah but was in (coincidentally) Illinois when the 1967 war broke out was not allowed to return there for most of his life and even now can only be there on a tourist visa (which is actually what he's doing at the moment!) And of course there are thousands of stories like that. Famous Palestinian artist Ismael Shammout who was born in Lydda in 1930 witnessed the massacre and forced expulsion there, became a refugee, made his way to the US, and on a tourist visa was many years later able to see the house he had been removed from in 1948. (When he knocked on the door the Jewish family resident there refused to let him in.) He died this year and was never able to see his dream of the return of the refugees and a Palestinian homeland in peace.

OK- so you say- ending Jewish immigration and inviting the refugees back would be a demographic disaster. It would mean the destruction of the state of Israel! No it wouldn't. First of all, any demographic consideration is pure racism. We would not tolerate racial or religious exclusivity in the US, so why do we even mention it where Israel is conerned? Second, you watch how quickly peace happens if and when Israel ever makes this kind of gesture (I'm talking about all of teh above terms). And under this peace, with a majority Arab population living peacefully side by side with a minority Jewish population- certainly with internationals on the ground to maintain order for awhile (more to deal with the fanatical right-wing settlers than anybody else!) this majority Arab population who has a right to be there, would probably vote to change the flag, change the national anthem, change the name of the country, and change the policy by which it is a Jewish-exclusivist state. Would that be the end of Israel? No. It would be a REAL democracy, by whatever name, with whatever flag. Democracy is what we SAY we want over there, and what we convince ourselves Israel has, when in fact democracy is impossible in a state which is exclusivist to any group, and what they have now that they CALL democracy is a total farce.

AND- even more important then democracy, there would be justice. (OK, the democracy is part and parcel of the justice.) So now you say a two-state solution in the meantime- because these belligerent Zionists won't come to their senses? Maybe at a point that would have been a good idea, but THEY have deliberately made that solution impossible by the deliberate expansion of the settlements and confiscation of more and more land and water completely destroying the possibility of a contiguous Palestinian state. So- the settler have to go. (Eventually, when they are willing to behave themselves in a peaceful multi-ethnic democracy, they can come back.)

Solved it, didn't I? Not so complicated!

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 01:04 PM   #4
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
PS- failed to answer the following

I was so verbose on my soap box that I failed to completely respond to the reply:

The UN disagrees with you that 60 years is too long for a claim to real estate to still be relevant- and so do I, which doesn't matter nearly as much as the UN. There are many people who lost homes in 1948, in 1967, and in various incidents in between and since, that still have keys- and emotional attachments- to where they came from. There are still multitudes who are destitute in camps. They need to be allowed home. Perhaps not to a specific house, as it would not be just to remove Jews who have been entrenched in their homes for decades either (except of course for settlers, who must be removed). But the refugees need to return- somewhere- and the details of that would be different in each case- to be worked out probably by some UN-appointed organization or equivalent.

I don't argue that 350 years is completely invalid either. The US and Canada and other western countries need to do much more for indigenous Americans. But re: Judaism's 2,000 year old claim to Palestine, we blew it! We could have had a settlement there, a limited homeland, with cultural institutions, respectful of the rights of the native population- as was espoused by Einstein, Ahrendt, Brandeis, etc. in the program of "Cultural Zionism", but the fanatics didn't want it, and neither did Zionism's corporate sponsors, so the fanatics won out.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 01:07 PM   #5
Michael Ohlstein
Registered User
 
Michael Ohlstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Old Brookville, NY
Posts: 199
OK, now you're living in a dream world.......

I'm not even sure where to start. When you suggest the ending of open Jewish immigration, you demonstrate a lack of a basic understanding of the whole point of having set up a 'Jewish State'. And you were the president of a Zionist youth group?

I fear that you may be unreachable.

Rich, perhaps you should consider counseling.
Michael Ohlstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 01:46 PM   #6
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
dream world

Was in the dream world when I was president of a Zionist youth group. Dreamed that Zionism and the state of Israel have never harmed anyone, that the Arabs were just Nazi's with sun-tans. I could go on.

I am well-versed and well-aware of the point of having a Jewish state- and it's a morally bankrupt equation. And that's exactly the problem with Zionism- well the first of two problems- the second was seizing that land from an indigenous population. There was a time when Zionism (Jewish nationalism) was considering setting up an equally racist state in sparsely populated areas of Uganda or Argentina. But Zionism had to have the land of Zion, and it's inhabitants be damned. The rest is history- and a very bad history indeed.

No counseling today, thanks.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 02:28 PM   #7
Michael Ohlstein
Registered User
 
Michael Ohlstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Old Brookville, NY
Posts: 199
Hey....I'm just a guy who makes tee shirts for a living. But from where I stand it seems to me that you were impressionable as a child, and things haven't changed.

You thought you were right then, and you think that you're right now. I think that you were delusional then, and that you're delusional now.

But then.....it's our differences that make things interesting.

You go, boy.
Michael Ohlstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 03:30 PM   #8
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
T shirts and delusions

Are you the guy who made the T shirts for Ron Rudoph's softball charity event this summer?

re: delusional- what I have laid out is an easy prescription for peace, and there are many many people who embrace exactly these terms. The problem with those who don't is that THEY are delusional. They believe first of all, the Jews need Israel as a safe place, when even a cursory examination of the situation reveals that Israel is terribly unsafe, and is making things unsafe for Jews around the world. We are the most successful minority in the US- and we live peaceful successful lives in many locations. Israel is threatening that peace, for itself and for us.

And the second delusion- which is at the root of it all- is the belief that there is a different kind of human being called a Jew- that we are"special" or "chosen"- a light unto the nations- while attacking children and international human rights workers in Hebron- some light!!. We need to get over that quickly- and then there will be peace.

I will be on the right side of history with this. If you and those many others who insist on a Jewish-exclusivist state live long enough you will be like George Wallace who lived long enough to remember with embarrassment having prevented Black students from entering the University of Alabama. Of course- this is all assuming we survive WW lll which Israel is actively getting us into. God willing!

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2006, 08:29 PM   #9
Marty Guttman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kew Garden Hills, NY
Posts: 53
For many years I believed one non-sectarian state was the only answer, maybe there was a time when it was. Not today. Do you honestly think after 3 score years of proganda and hatred these people can live together? Should the Israelis who call the land home believe that in your resolved one country that the Islamisists will not do more than taunt the Jewish children walking to school.

A fair resolution, that I hoped you would offer, would be a cessation of violence against each other, major investment in infrastructure(roads, schools, hospitals etc), a common curriculum in public schools(that addresses the excessess of both sides), a melding of currencies and beauracrcies, investments in the formally occupied areas to create jobs, reparations to those who lost property and that would be only the begining..
Marty Guttman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2006, 09:28 AM   #10
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
propaganda

I think the subject of propaganda needs clarification. On the Jewish side there is nothing but propaganda. Michael stated that I was delusional when as a teenager and president of a Zionist youth organization I believed that Zionism and the state of Israel had done nobody any wrong, etc. That was what I was taught- that's what all the Jewish adults in my life were saying- and when it came up- with my WelMet chums, with the Jewish kids I knew in high school and in Jewish organizations- that was how we all thought. Maybe Michael comes from some exceptional background where the crimes of Zionism/Israel were acknowledged. But I think for most of us, we were fed lies and we believed them. The Zionist propaganda program was very successful and remains so to this day.

I don't see propaganda as being a factor on the Palestinian side at all. They have all personally witnessed Zionism's ongoing efforts to destroy their society. Certainly they don't need any propaganda to embellish on that. They have chosen to respond to it in different ways- some more militant than others. And I don't blame them for being militant at all. I don't know that a non-violent approach has any chance in this situation. Let's face it- the British had less invested in India, the "White Crackers" had less invested in segregation in the American south, than the Jews- especially the religious right-wing- have invested in Israel. They want to take over all of the land from the Jordan to the sea and up to the Litani- and perhaps more, and kick every non-Jew out. Hard to negotiate with that kind of insanity! So- where Gandhi's and ML King's non-violent approach was workable in the two locations mentioned above, is it really for the Palestinians? Can we blame them for taking up arms when they see a program hell-bent on destroying their society and getting rid of them?

The Palestinians have never been offered anything more than a non-contiguous fractured semi-autonomous homeland of ghettos within a Jewish system of settlements and Jewish-only roads. I am sure, and I say this as one who is in direct contact with numerous people on the "other side" of this equation- that if Israel were to offer the Palestinians something they could really live with, the extremist elements among them would be brought into line. The extremists I'm worried about are the right-wing Jewish fanatics.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2006, 03:03 PM   #11
Marty Guttman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kew Garden Hills, NY
Posts: 53
Through all the rhetoric(since you object to the term propaganda) you didn't answer the essential question. Do you really think, after all that has occurred that these people can live together?
Marty Guttman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2006, 04:08 PM   #12
rabrouns
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 29
Let's be objective

I recall a rather poor-tasting joke which poked fun of those jews who would do anything to avoid "making trouble" to the world. It went something like this;

Q: What is the view point of a jew?
A: The other guy's

Rich, I not going to start dictating who's right or wrong on this complicated issue. The variables have gotten too interwoven and extensive. However, what bothers me is that you seem to be taking "the other guys side" when, in fact, the other guy has not been innocent either (as you so illustrate about Israel). The Arab community has had plenty of opportunities to choose peace, or to at least help their poor Palestinian brothers and sisters instead of letting them wallow in poverty to the point that they are ready to be used as pawns...to blow themselves up in the name of God. Rich, do you really buy that?

The point is this: Israel has to deal with this suicide-bombing type of mentality. How does one reason with that? Yet you seem convinced that Israel is to blame. Try looking at the other side. Maybe because you felt betrayed from your younger years in believing Israel was a completely righteous government that you now compensate to such a degree. Peace can be a reality. It will just take a desire from both sides. And from what I have seen, Israel has made numerous good faith attempts...Just look at the last days of the Clinton Administration. Has any Arab country even offered as much to the Palestinians?

Rich, stop being so condemming if Israel..at least without condemming it's neighbors.
rabrouns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2006, 05:08 PM   #13
ArtBefartnickle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melville NY
Posts: 69
Here is a little something for revisionist history loving types (Rich):

One small comment first. My grandfather came to America as a refugee in 1901. He had sons and daughters who fought in WWII and sent many a Nazi to Valhallah. My father bought a piece of property on LI and built a house. He and I have every right to live here...just like every Israeli has a right to live in Israel. Today, contantanoble is Istanbul and 99% muslim, but 1,000 years ago it was 100% Christian. No one tells the Muslims to go home. My friend had an interesting story, his name is Adam Hakimi and his family is from Baghdad. In 1979 after his family had lived in Iraq for close to 3,000 years was asked at the point of a rifle to get the f out or die the next day. They like a million other Sephardic Jews left the next day, leaving everything behind (kind of like the story told 1,000's of times before by Jews going back to 70AD). The Israelis let 1,000,000 arabs become citizens of their country. Not one Jew in a Muslim State goes to bed at night without fear of the knock on the door. Where you hang your hat is your home and you have every right to live there, even NJ. If you need to hold it by force, do so. If a native American comes to your door and demands his right to return, poke him in the chest and tell him to get a lawyer. You bought your home and own it.

Arab leaders and media outlets have long been addicted to comparing Israel to the Nazi regime, while at the same time demeaning the extent of the Holocaust. This obsession with defaming and antagonizing the Jewish people and state was on full display in recent months and reached a crescendo – or rather nadir – the day before Pope John Paul II visited the Temple Mount during his Holy Land pilgrimage. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Sheikh Ekrima Sabri, just hours before hosting the Pope, gave a series of press interviews, first telling the AP: "The figure of 6 million Jews killed during the Holocaust is exaggerated and is used by the Israelis to gain international support… It’s not my problem. Muslims didn’t do anything on this issue. It’s the doing of Hitler who hated the Jews," asserted the acid-tongued Mufti – a figure appointed by Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. "Six million? It was a lot less," Sabri repeated for an Italian newspaper. "It’s not my fault if Hitler hated the Jews. Anyway, they hate them just about everywhere." The Mufti finished the day with Reuters, charging, "We denounce all massacres, but I don’t see why a certain massacre should be used for political gain and blackmail." However, as a matter of record, there was a well-documented, thriving relationship between the Arab/Muslim world and Nazi Germany, with perhaps the most significant figure linking Hitler to the Middle East being none other Sabri’s very own predecessor, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin el-Husseini. Here is a brief review of that dark, overlooked chapter in history.

The Führer’s Mufti: After World War I, the Great Powers of Europe jockeyed for influence in the Middle East’s oil fields and trade routes, with France and Britain holding mandates throughout most of the region. In the 1930s, the fascist regimes that arose in Italy and Germany sought greater stakes in the area, and began courting Arab leaders to revolt against their British and French custodians. Among their many willing accomplices was Jerusalem Mufti Haj Amin el-Husseini, who fled Palestine after agitating against the British during the Arab Revolt of 1936-39. He found refuge in Iraq – another of Her Majesty’s mandates – where he again topped the British most wanted list after helping pull the strings behind the Iraqi coup of 1941. The revolt in Baghdad was orchestrated by Hitler as part of a strategy to squeeze the region between the pincers of Rommel’s troops in North Africa, German forces in the Caucuses and pro-Nazi forces in Iraq. However, in June 1941 British troops put down the rebellion and the Mufti escaped via Tehran to Italy and eventually to Berlin.

Once in Berlin, the Mufti received an enthusiastic reception by the "Islamische Zentralinstitut" and the whole Islamic community of Germany, which welcomed him as the "Führer of the Arabic world." In an introductory speech, he called the Jews the "most fierce enemies of the Muslims" and an "ever corruptive element" in the world. Husseini soon became an honored guest of the Nazi leadership and met on several occasions with Hitler. He personally lobbied the Führer against the plan to let Jews leave Hungary, fearing they would immigrate to Palestine. He also strongly intervened when Adolf Eichman tried to cut a deal with the British government to exchange German POWs for 5000 Jewish children who also could have fled to Palestine. The Mufti’s protests with the SS were successful, as the children were sent to death camps in Poland instead. One German officer noted in his journals that the Mufti would liked to have seen the Jews "preferably all killed." On a visit to Auschwitz, he reportedly admonished the guards running the gas chambers to work more diligently. Throughout the war, he appeared regularly on German radio broadcasts to the Middle East, preaching his pro-Nazi, anti-Semitic message to the Arab masses back home.

To show gratitude towards his hosts, in 1943 the Mufti travelled several times to Bosnia, where on orders of the SS he recruited the notorious "Hanjar troopers," a special Bosnian Waffen SS company which slaugh-tered 90% of Bosnia’s Jews and burned countless Serbian churches and villages. These Bosnian Muslim recruits rapidly found favor with SS chief Heinrich Himmler, who established a special Mullah Military school in Dresden.

The only condition the Mufti set for his help was that after Hitler won the war, the entire Jewish population in Palestine should be liquidated. After the war, Husseini fled to Switzerland and from there escaped via France to Cairo, were he was warmly received. The Mufti used funds received earlier from the Hilter regime to finance the Nazi-inspired Arab Liberation Army that terrorized Jews in Palestine.

The Arab Embrace of Nazism: Husseini represents the prevalent pro-Nazi posture among the Arab/Muslim world before, during and even after the Holocaust. The Nazi-Arab connection existed even when Adolf Hitler first seized power in Germany in 1933. News of the Nazi takeover was welcomed by the Arab masses with great enthusiasm, as the first congratulatory telegrams Hitler received upon being appointed Chancellor came from the German Consul in Jerusalem, followed by those from several Arab capitals. Soon afterwards, parties that imitated the National Socialists were founded in many Arab lands, like the "Hisb-el-qaumi-el-suri" (PPS) or Social Nationalist Party in Syria. Its leader, Anton Sa’ada, styled himself the Führer of the Syrian nation, and Hitler became known as "Abu Ali" (In Egypt his name was "Muhammed Haidar"). The banner of the PPS displayed the swastika on a black-white background. Later, a Lebanese branch of the PPS – which still receives its orders from Damascus – was involved in the assassination of Lebanese President Pierre Gemayel.

The most influential party that emulated the Nazis was "Young Egypt," which was founded in October 1933. They had storm troopers, torch processions, and literal translations of Nazi slogans – like "One folk, One party, One leader." Nazi anti-Semitism was replicated, with calls to boycott Jewish businesses and physical attacks on Jews. Britain had a bitter experience with this pro-German mood in Egypt, when the official Egyptian government failed to declare war on the Wehrmacht as German troops were about to conquer Alexandria.

After the war, a member of Young Egypt named Gamal Abdul Nasser was among the officers who led the July 1952 revolution in Egypt. Their first act – following in Hitler’s footsteps – was to outlaw all other parties. Nasser’s Egypt became a safe haven for Nazi war criminals, among them the SS General in charge of the murder of Ukrainian Jewry; he became Nasser’s bodyguard and close comrade. Alois Brunner, another senior Nazi war criminal, found shelter in Damascus, where he served for many years as senior adviser to the Syrian general staff and still resides today.

Sami al-Joundi, one of the founders of the ruling Syrian Ba’ath Party, recalls: "We were racists. We admired the Nazis. We were immersed in reading Nazi literature and books... We were the first who thought of a translation of Mein Kampf. Anyone who lived in Damascus at that time was witness to the Arab inclination toward Nazism."

These leanings never completely ceased. Hitler’s Mein Kampf currently ranks sixth on the best-seller list among Palestinian Arabs. Luis Al-Haj, translator of the Arabic edition, writes glowingly in the preface about how Hitler’s "ideology" and his "theories of nationalism, dictatorship and race… are advancing especially within our Arabic States." When Palestinian police first greeted Arafat in the self-rule areas, they offered the infamous Nazi salute - the right arm raised straight and upward.

The PLO and notably Arafat himself do not make a secret of their source of inspiration. The Grand Mufti el-Husseini is venerated as a hero by the PLO. It should be noted, that the PLO’s top figure in east Jerusalem today, Faisal Husseini, is the grandson to the Führer’s Mufti. Arafat also considers the Grand Mufti a respected educator and leader, and in 1985 declared it an honor to follow in his footsteps. Little wonder. In 1951, a close relative of the Mufti named Rahman Abdul Rauf el-Qudwa el-Husseini matriculated to the University of Cairo. The student decided to conceal his true identity and enlisted as "Yasser Arafat."
ArtBefartnickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2006, 11:08 PM   #14
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
can they live together?

Wow- I knew this was going to be fun- three responses- but I can only handle one at a time. I just got back from a job and it's late. You know- I don't argue this stuff for a living- although I kind of wish I did. So- I'll just address the first one and get back about the other two later.

Do I believe these people can live together after all that's happened? YES!

Why? The American South 1955, South Africa 1985. You could have asked that same question with regard to those locations during the years mentioned, and it would have been unbelievable to say- yes they can live together. But now they are doing so. And the transition wasn't easy, it had flaws, in the deep South there was violence, and even today things are far from perfect, but on both sides of each equation people agree that things are better today without institutionalized racism, and things will be better in Israel/Palestine without institutionalized racism. Absolutely!
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 07:00 AM   #15
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
what Bobby wrote

Let's see. Because I'm opposing the commonly-held Jewish point of view, that makes me a Jewish stereotype. But- if I were a supporter of this point of view- Zionism- the view that indeed most Jews do support- I would by definition also have to be a Jewish stereotype. So, no matter what position I hold I will be a Jewish stereotype. And I suppose this is my destiny, since I was born a Jew, to be a Jewish stereotype. I suppose, when the time comes I will die in a stereotypically Jewish way as well.

Bobby is deflecting any meaningful dialogue by taking the focus off the facts and the moral implications of those facts, and instead putting the focus on- well- on muddling everything up. He claims the issues are too complicated- OK- so- the situation is helpless- they'll just kill each other forever and get us into WW lll because nobody's smart enough to understand it. Bull-patties! The situation is simple- amazingly simple. Zionism wanted land that someone else lived on. Zionism took that land, and did so violently. And the Zionist state of Israel is continuing to ethnically cleanse this land. The victims are pissed off. Doesn't get much simpler than that.

Then after his racist Anti-Semitic remark in which he accused me of being a Jewish stereotype, he gives us an equally racist Arab stereotype. Israel has to deal with a "suicide bomber" mentality. OK the Arabs didn't invent the suicide bomber. Do you know anything about the Japanese kamikazi's? And the Arabs did not begin the terrorism in Palestine. Do you know anything about a particular hotel in Jerusalem that was bomed by Jewish terrorists causing massive loss of life and injury to British, Arab, and other victims- including Jews? (and that's only one example of Jewish terrorism- out of many!) I'm not condoning Palestinian violence, although I have to admit that if I were in their position I would probably be violent, too.

And what good faith attempts at resolving the conflict is he talking about? I already wrote in a previous post that Israel has not offered anything better than non-contiguous ghettos within an Israeli system of settlements and Jewish-only roads. Bobby hasn't offered anything of substance to counter what I said, but simply makes this statement of "good faith attempts" without backing it up at all.

And he insists that I have to condemn Israel's neighbors in order to have the right to criticize Israel. Let's see how that transfers to another situation. Would I be required to condemn Poland and France in order to have the right to criticize Nazi Germany?

Bobby- give me something I can work with, OK?

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 02:39 PM   #16
Marty Guttman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kew Garden Hills, NY
Posts: 53
Please clarify-Does the fact that the Arabs didn't invent suicide bombings make it any less odious? Does the promise of heaven to these suicide bombers give it justification?
We can go back in history to find justification for just about anything.
You will have to do a whole lot better if you want to convince anyone that I can trust people who are proud of the fact that they want to destroy a people.
Marty Guttman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 07:40 AM   #17
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
Shamir'r proposal to the Nazi's

Had two jobs yesterday and am doing the childcare thing today. So- very busy. Will respond to both Marty and Art fully when I have time to do so. In the meantime- and as partial response to Art- here's Yitzhak Shamir's 1941 proposal to the Nazi's:

"The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis and bound by a treaty with the German Reich would be in the interest of strengthening the future German nation of power in the Near East...The NMO (Irgun) in Palestine offers to take an active part in the war on Germany's side."

Shamir- later to become prime minister of Israel, submitted this proposal as leader of LEHI, using the name of its parent organization NMO (Irgun). The Nazi's rejected this proposal as they considered LEHI's military power negligable.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 12:29 PM   #18
Michael Ohlstein
Registered User
 
Michael Ohlstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Old Brookville, NY
Posts: 199
Which proves what........?
Michael Ohlstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 02:11 PM   #19
Marty Guttman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kew Garden Hills, NY
Posts: 53
Good point, proving what?
Marty Guttman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 04:58 PM   #20
ArtBefartnickle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melville NY
Posts: 69
Weak people like Rich always end up in the ovens at treblinca. Tell me why Rich that 1,000,000 arabs are living in Israel and 1 old jew is living in Bahdad and 3 Jews left in Tehran. Or the story where Israel is building the wall Not like the ruskies to keep people in butto keep them out; that some arab farmer asked the israelis to build the wall with his property on the Israeli side? Name me one reasonable arab government and I will take out to the Veggy restaurant of your choice as I am sure you don't eat meat.

When did you grandma in the name of hate and intolerance strap on a bomb and blow her self up?

I would get a great big plow and push the al asqa mosque over the side. It was created by the Ottoman's as the Saudis were charging to much to do the Haj to Mecca so they needed another site to pray at that was reasonable, forget the bs about Mo going to heaven from that site. A nice large temple built in the classic Greco Roman tradition would look great on that empty site.

You are a sad jew who must have been circumsized in a Cordoba, believe me the ride was not was they said it was.
ArtBefartnickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2006, 02:51 PM   #21
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
poster-boy for anti-semitism

I was actually going to respond to the posts that I was not able to respond to in the last few days due to just being plain old busy. But then I read
"ArtBefartnickle's" post and I'll have to take a long shower to get the stink off me. Art- you're a poster-boy for anti-semitism. The good news is that these posts are open for anyone to see- you only have to be a Wel-Met alum to join and participate. So, the usefulness here is that any time I have a conversation with anyone who doesn't believe how disgusting Zionists can be, all I have to do is send them to Art's post on this list.

But I will be getting back with regard to the more intelligent things that were presented previously. Need to take that long hot shower, first. Maybe a few showers- maybe a few days. Enjoy living a life of hatred, Art.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2006, 06:13 PM   #22
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
Jewish community of Tehran

Back from my shower. Here's a link to an article about the Jewish community in Tehran, made up of 25,000 people and 11 synagogues.

http://www.sephardicstudies.org/iran.html

As for the Jewish community of Baghdad, well, no one's doing very well in Baghdad these days, are they?

The question I bring back to you gentlemen, and in Art's case I use the term very generously, is this: Do you want to have an intelligent conversation in which you might 1) learn something and 2) teach this Anti-Zionist something, or, do you want to act stupid?

Art- don't talk with your mouth full. You've got blood dripping down your chin from that raw steak you're chewing on.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2006, 07:23 PM   #23
rabrouns
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 29
Giving Rich Something to Work With

OK Rich…I think I need to set a few things straight before I respond to you.

First, I never said you were a stereotypical Jew. It is quite evident from your basic philosophy that you are anything but that. Never once did I use the words “stereotype” or “typical” to describe you or your views. This was strictly a superimposed summation on your part. The fact that you have some traits that we recognize as one, which Alan Dershowitz refers to as the offensive concept of shanda fur de goyim, does not mean anything other than you refusing to rid yourself of the pathological fear of offending our “American hosts” (again, from Alan Dershowitz…A great defender of Judaism throughout the world).

BTW, what is a stereotypical way for a Jew to die, as you so state about yourself?

I find it interesting, if not hypocritical of you, to get so defensive about my stating that you are “taking the other guy’s view” (which I made it very clear that it was an unfortunate “bad Joke”), when in fact, you prefer to embrace those who have the philosophy to kill Jews or “drive the Jew into the sea” (which BTW, was a common phrase of the Arab League, which was first used in 1947 by the Arab League’s Secretary General, Abd al-Rahman Azzam Pasha during an Arab League meeting in Amman, Jordan). Rich, don’t you find that type of rhetoric offensive and dangerous? And this was said BEFORE there was a Palestinian refugee problem. Why are you so vindictive with my reference to your obvious shanda fur goyim, while taking a passive and even accepting position for the overt charges of “driving the Jew into the sea?” Rich, please explain.

You try to equate the WWII Japanese Kamikazis with Islamic suicide bombers. Rich, come on! Kamikazis were targeting U.S. war ships during military battles. Suicide bombers are targeting civilians…children going to pizza parlors or dances or just going shopping. Are you serious that when you place these two in the same category? Rich, you need to concede that Kamikazis and suicide bombers are not the same.

You say that you do not condone Palestinian violence, yet within the very same sentence you say “I have to admit that if I were in their position I would probably be violent too.” Rich that’s called condoning violence! Not condoning such actions is saying Palestinian Violence is wrong….period.

As far as my statement that the issues are too complicated, it was merely to focus in the present day situation and leave the history out of it, as we would only get bogged down in a type of dialogue of “yes they did, no they didn’t.” Not to mention the lengthy postings created. But it looks like that is what needs to be done in order to fully present one’s view point. OK, so be it.

Rich, I’m just trying to “give you something to work with.”

You also mentioned that it is erroneous to point finger at the Palestinian’s Arab neighbors, as I state that such countries (Jordan-the country that has killed more Palestinians than any other country per the 1971 Black September massacre, Lebanon, who also violently removed the PLO, Syria, Egypt, Iran, as well as Yassar Arafat himself- one of the world’s richest men before dying and not spending his wealth to develop an infrastructure for the basic necessities of his people), have been using the Palestinian people as pawns. The Palestinian Refugee problem could have long been a non-issue if any one of these entities really wanted to help. Yet, you equate my views to Nazi Germany in reference to not pointing a finger at Germany’s neighbors. I assume you are saying that I should be blaming such European nations as Poland or France for allowing the holocaust to happen, as you say it is a similar circumstance as pointing a finger at the Arab community for not taking a active effort to help their brothers and sisters. Rich, I think history is not on your side for this one. Poland and France were not just indifferent about the atrocities to Jews, but they were only too willing to participate in the annihilation of Jews. On the other hand if you are saying that they should have tried to stop Nazi aggression, well, they did try. Only they were soundly defeated and suffered their own victimization. So, Rich, can you please clarify what you’re trying to get across here? Just to reiterate, my point is that, I have heard the Arab nations crying before the world about the suffering of their Palestinian brothers and sisters and yet they won’t do a single thing (other than supply weapons for destruction) to relieve their suffering.

In earlier postings you state that the Arab leaders never told the Palestinian people to leave their land during the 1948 Israeli War for Independence (my term for the 1948 War) and Jews never extended an offer for Palestinians to stay in Israel and live in peace. According to a pro-Palestinian Historian, Ilan Pappe, in his book, “A History of Modern Palestine,” states about the Mayor of Haifa’s offer to stay, “Very few Palestinians stayed in the city and their leaders considered the Jews offer to stay deceitful and hypocritical.” Pappe goes on to say “The Arab leaders, preferring not to surrender, announced that they and their community intended to evacuate the town, despite a plea from the Jewish mayor that they should stay.” Understanding that this a Palestinian point-of-view and the reasoning of the Palestinian decision to leave differs from the Jewish one, the point is that an offer was made and the Palestinian leaders made the decision to leave. In another incident involving the city of Joffa, the historian Benny Morris references the personal diary of David ben Gurion, where there was no fighting between Jews and Arabs. Ben Gurion wrote, “I couldn’t understand why the inhabitants…leave?”.

Today, in Israel, Israeli Arabs (as they call themselves) live peacefully. I am not just spouting this off. I have sat down with Israeli Arabs; have broke bread with them, drank with them and have been referred to by them as “brother.” They all say that Jews and Palestinians can work out their own problems by themselves, with Israel remaining a sovereign nation. It has been the political machine, yes, on both sides, that have been the obstacle. My problem, Rich, is that the Palestinian people have been used as pawns by their own brothers. And they have done so in the name of hate….hate for Israel and as such, are not receptive for the Jewish state to exist.

It is interesting to note, that when the intifada began in 1988, Israel was a nation for 40 years and that for half of its life time (20 years), the lands that the Palestinians have been seeking to have as their home, were in the hands of their Arab brothers and sisters. Of course I’m referring to the West Bank, Gaza strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem. Rich, their were Palestinian refugees from 1948 to 1967 while these lands were in the hands a Arabs people. Why wasn’t this land given to the Palestinians then? Why has it become such an issue only after these lands were in the hands of Israel? Yet I hear the Arab community crying to the world about how their poor Palestinian live in squalor. Talk about bull-patties (to use your vernacular right back at you)!

Rich, while it is obvious your point-of-view is something that I oppose, I do welcome your thoughts. I only ask that we keep with the issues. I am asking that you take a look at the Islamic countries and see they have the ability to present a positive influence on the Israeli-Palestinian situation. However, based on what I’m able to see, they have decided to do nothing but provoke the Palestinians towards a path of violence. I believe that the Arab nations hold the key to peace in the Middle East. It is unjust to place this burden on Israel.

Bobby Brounstein
rabrouns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2006, 08:22 AM   #24
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
responding as fully as possible

OK I'll try to respond to everything, but don't you guys let me get away with anything, OK, If I leave anything out, let me know.

Re: the stereotypical Jew thing- Bobby- your humorous little comment definitely made the statement that in taking the "other guy's" side I was being a typical- if not stereo-typical Jew. I don't really care what is typical or stereo-typical, as far as this political issue goes. What I care about is a human rights disaster. When I commented that I will probably die a stereo-typical Jewish death I didn't have any particular kind of death in mind. It was simply my sarcastic way of responding to Bobby's having taken the focus off the issues by making me out to be a stereotypical Jew.

Re- Alan Dershowitz- that "great champion of the Jews": Read Norman Finkelstein's "Beyond Chutzpah". Joan Peters invented statistics in her book "From Time Immemorial" to make it seem as if most Palestinians are not really Palestinians- that they're immigrants, which is false. Dershowitz then plagiarized Peters. As part of the team that got OJ off, nothing surprises me from Dershowitz. Unfair statement? I don't care. He's slime, and his book "The Case for Israel" is so inaccurate he's either incompetent or disingenuous, or both.

Re: Arab refugees returning to Gaza and the West Bank during the years 1948 to 1967. The refugees came from behind the green line and landed in large numbers in Gaza and the West Bank (as well as in Jordan, Lebanon, etc.) The suggestion that they could have returned to a place where they landed as refugees simply shows an ignorance of the situation. The place that they wanted to return to, and where under international law as well as UN resolution 194 they had the right to return to, was the areas of Palestine that they were expelled from, which were now the state of Israel (behind the green line).

Re: Haifa and your quotes from Ilan Pappe and Benny Morris, you are being extremely selective. Did you read in entirety the books that you excerpted? What kinds of things were discussed in the other 99% of the content of those books? I just purchased, but have not read yet, Ilan Pappe's newest book, "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine". Clearly, just by the title, we know that this author's research into the events has yielded a conclusion very different from the conclusion you want to draw from what he wrote about Haifa.

Haifa is the place that Zionists like to hold up as proof that Arabs were not expelled in 1948. And I'm surprised you didn't milk it for all it's worth. Let me help you: The Jewish mayor, with tears streaming down his face, begging the Arab community not to go. This actually did happen. However, consider that it's not the whole story. The mayor did not have control over the actual military actions in Haifa, which included a massacre and forced expulsions from some neighborhoods, and an all in all very dangerous situation for Arabs who attemtped to remain, and some did. And then what transpired is as you say. The Arabs did not trust the ensuing Jewish offer to remain, and further, they did not want to be accused of collaboration with the conquering Jewish militia, and so, in this case, there was in fact an order by the Arab leadership to evacuate. However, this is NOT representative of what happend in the rest of Palestine. A bit later on, just down the road from Haifa, in the Upper Galilee, during Operation Hiram, the conquest of Arab villages was accompanied by the rounding up of all males of military age and summarily shooting them, while then expelling everyone else.

re: breaking bread with Israeli Arabs, and the farmer that Art says he knows who asked to be on the Israeli side of the wall- who knows? I remember during the 1968 presidential elections an interview with a black man who was voting for George Wallace. Who can say why certain individuals make statements or come to certain conclusions which are against their better interests. The fact is that Arab Israeli's are fourth-class citizens who have practically no rights. You can say that they can vote and that there are Arabs in the Knesset, but so what? It is illegal for there to be any political party in Israel that opposes the existence of the state of Israel as a Jewish exlusivist state. So by definition it is not a democracy, and the Arabs have no meaningful political representation. The can only legally act politically withinin the context of agreeing to Jewish domination. Then consider teh fact that Arabs who, in 1948, were present inside Israel but absent from their homes had their homes confiscated and given to Jews. Arab residents of villages that are conveniently not recognized by the Israeli government are not given any utilities or services and then, at the whim of the government, often have their homes confiscated and are evicted. Arab Israeli's have a very bad time trying to get permits to build homes or to expand on existing homes. I could go on. It is a Jewish-exclusivist country by definition- FOR JEWS!- that begrudgingly accommodates a population of Arab "cockroaches" that it was unable to completely expel in 1948, and if you found some Arabs who are happy under those circumstances, then I guess you had a good lunch date.

Art went to great lenghts to prove that Arabs are racist Nazi sympathizers. Good work! Let me think about some other people who were Nazi sympathizers: Let's see, the other axis powers, Italy and Japan, were fighting on the side of Germany, and then there were all the collaborating governments: Austria, Croatia, Vichy France, and Finland. Am I leaving anybody out? So why don't Jew colonize Finland, and expel a few hundred thousand Finns? Here's why: Two reasons 1) the basic rules of racism dictate that blond-haired white people don't get colonized and evicted, and 2) Zionism wanted the land of Zion, pure and simple.

Speaking of Finland, there was actually a good reason why they supported Hitler: their neighbors the Russians had been giving them a very bad time, and Hitler was fighting the Russians. Take that logic and let's revisit the Arabs. What was going on in Arab countries at that time? Britian was in control of Palestine, Trans-Jordan, and Iraq, and were messing around in Egypt. France was in control of Syria and Lebanon. A lot of people in those countries didn't appreciate the European presence there. Now in addition what else was going on? Zionism was in full swing and its intention of making an Araber-rein Jewish state in Palestine was absolutely known throughout the Arab region and was not at all popular. Herzl had stated his intention for "transfer" of the Arab population as early as 1895, the early Yishuv made it policy to exclude Arabs from its economy in 1905. Unfair land-purchase practices were in full swing. (These consisted of paying a premium for desired agricultural land from absentee landlords and evicting Arab tenant farmers who had generally been on the land for generations or even centuries.) So- given all of that, it isn't hard to imagine why Arabs might find it attractive to ally themselves with the power who was opposing the British, the French, and the Jews. And if they were additionally attracted to a racial policy that portrayed the Jews as being inferior, well that's really pretty shameful, isn't it? But seems to me that Zionism had a similar racial policy with regard to the Arabs- and we're seeing the "final solution" unfold in Gaza right now.

The thing that was relevant about the Shamir quote I posted previously- thanks for asking- was that since Art has gone into some detail accusing the Arabs of being Nazi-collaborators, let's also examine the fact that Zionists were also Nazi- collaborators. I can go into further detail about Zionist deals with the Nazi's if you all are interested in that, and Zionist efforts to thwart efforts to resue Jews which would have delivered them anywhere but Palestine- including the boycotting of the Evian conference- but I'm trying to keep this inevitably long post as short as possible.

The central point I want to get at is this: You all are talking around the main issue. You want to make Arabs out to be evil. OK- I don't have to put angels wings on these Arabs to show that they have been victimized by Zionism. And Bobby is right in pointing out an essential difference between the Japanese Kamikaze's and the Palestinian suicide bomber. But none of you have answered or even touched upon this central point: Do human beings who happen to be on the ground in a particular location have any rights at all? OK- Americans villifed the Native Americans as we were conquering them. Europeans made the Africans out to be inferior as they were colonizing Africa. I don't have to prove that Native Americans or Africans were in any way perfect to prove that they were victims. We all know they were victims- and we all now that they were, among themselves, very imperfect. But somehow I am given the burden of producing an Arab angel with wings in order to prove that the Arabs of Palestine have a legitimate complaint against Zionism. They're not perfect, not even close. Not the Arabs of Palestine or in the larger Arab world. For Christ's sake, they kill each other!! If there had been any unity in the Arab world the state of Israel would never have been permitted to come into existence. But then you want to use the fact that they kill each other as justification for Zionism's killing them, too.

What gave Zionism the right to take over this land and expel its indigenous inhabitants? What gives Israel the right to be a Jewish excluvist state and treat its Arabs citizens very differently from its Jewish citizens (and additionally its Mizrahi- and African- Jewish citizens differently from its Ashkenazi citizens- which this thoroughly racist country definitely does)? What gives Israel the right to be the illegal occupier and colonizer of lands conquered in 1967 in violation of international law and numerous UN resolutions? And what gives Israel right to make life absolutely impossible for the Arab inhabitants of the territories, using extrajudiciary executions, administrative detentions (arrest for long periods without charge) of large numbers of people, check-points, curfews, closures, destruction of olives trees, manipulation and degradation of the water supply, and a wall that separates patients from hospitals, farmers from fields, students from schools, workers from jobs, etc. It is simply impossible to excuse all of this as "defense", and it is absolutely not defense. Even a cursory examination of the route of this wall, for example, shows a 600 kilometer wall for a 300 kilometer border, that's not even on the border (green line) in most places. Why? To snake all around the West Bank and wall in illegal settlements- to maximize Jewish-exlusive land for the Jewish-exclusivist state of Israel.

You can call the Arabs shit if you want. Why not? That's what racists do. It's what the Nazi's said about us. In more recent history, what the Hutu's said about the Tutsi's in Rwanda. It's easy- de-humanize your victims by making them out to be less than human, as well as a threat. But- you say, in the case of the Arabs, they really ARE evil vermin! Well- isn't that exactly what the Nazi's said about us. But- you repeat your objection- in their case they really ARE evil vermin! Ah- again yes- that's exactly what the Nazi's said about us. Expand your brain to where you can see that!

If human beings who happen to be on the ground in any location have any rights at all, then Zionism and the state of Israel are and have been a monstrous crime against humanity. There is just no getting around this.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2006, 08:59 AM   #25
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
important clafication

I need a good proof-reader. In addition to various misspellings in my below presentation, this statement needs clarification:

"Then consider the fact that Arabs who, in 1948, were present inside Israel but absent from their homes had their homes confiscated and given to Jews."

I am refering to what happened at the conclusion of hostilities at the end of 1948 and into 1949. During most of 1948 expulsions occurred throughout Israel- both before and after statehood was declared in May. At the conclusion of hostilities, Arabs who were present in Israel (inside the green line) but absent from their homes lost their homes, same as Arabs who were outside the green line.

-RS
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2006, 10:05 AM   #26
rabrouns
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 29
some thing's that were not responded

Rich just briefly.

Please respond to your comparison of suicide bombers and kamikazis. Do you really think they are similar? One refers to attacking battle ship during a battle and the other attaching civilians while walking in their neighborhoods?

Also, your comparison about not blaming Nazi Germany's neighbors during WWII as a reason for not blaming the Arab nations for not helping their brothers and sisters while they cry to the world about their horrible condition...yet they're more than willing to supply weapons of destruction. Can't you see that these nations (including Saudi Arabia) have the capability to provide a positive influence...yet they won't?

BTW, Alan Dershowitz is a trial lawyer....his job is to defend his clients. With regards to OJ...whether we agree/disagree with the verdict..is not relevant...let's stay on topic, yes?

gotta go

RAB......
rabrouns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2006, 10:46 AM   #27
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
Dershowitz etc.

OK Bobby- I already said that your objection to my comparison with kamikaze's was legitimate- did you respond to my post without reading it? Re: Dershowitz, I have allowed my distaste for the man to allow me to get a little off topic. But you are ready to pounce on any imperfection I make in my presentation so that YOU can take this discussion off topic rather than respond to what I have presented as the most essential part of the problem. Re: refugees- Jordan has made them citizens. Are they pawns of other governments? How the hell should I know? Could more be done for them? Probably. Most of them don't want to become citizens of the countries where they've landed. Most of them want to go back where they came from, which is their right under international law and under a multitude of UN resolutions.


Here is the statement that I made in my previous post which in my view represents the essence of the problem: If human beings who happen to be on the ground in any location have any rights at all, then Zionism and the state of Israel are and have been a monstrous crime against humanity. There is just no getting around this. Respond to that, please!

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2006, 03:32 PM   #28
rabrouns
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 29
"Monstrous Crimes Against Humanity"

Regarding your statement, “If human beings who happen to be on the ground in any location have any rights at all, then Zionism and the state of Israel are and have been a monstrous crime against humanity.”

Quite frankly, how in the world (literally) these two sentence fragments can be considered a logical flow? I assume you mean that Israel has no right to defend itself against aggression, such as suicide bombings and Katusha rockets, because you feel the Palestinians should not be “homeless.” Therefore it is Israel that has been committing the atrocities, yes? Hmmm…..The logic just doesn’t flow. From what I can see, it seems that is has been the Arab Community which has been chanting, “Death to Israel” and “Drive the Jews into the sea” are the ones committing the atrocities. I mean, just by using your statement, Israelis must have rights as they are “human beings who happen to be on the ground.” Yet today, even as we converse back and forth, we have Israel’s Arab neighbors continuing their “death to Israel” rhetoric. If any group of people has been denied the rights you describe and has a monstrous crime perpetrated against them, it has been the Jewish people. Rich, do you agree? I don’t see how you can’t. BTW, I’m sure you’re aware that the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is hosting a conference to determine if the Holocaust was fact or fiction (including whether gas chambers where really used). Rich…question. Is this absurd or do you also hold the belief that the Holocaust is a hoax that was designed by the Jews as a reason for the re-establishment of Israel? Iran…the suppliers of Hamas and Hesbollah for weapons of destruction aimed at Israel. Really now!

But if I understand you correctly, you believe that the U.N. Resolution 194 (which BTW, is a U.N. General Assembly Resolution: as such it is a recommendation; unlike Security Council Resolutions) gives the Palestinians the right to return (regardless of leaving on their own accord-documented proof- which you have strenuously tried to make light of- or being forced out-which I have no problem with as the Israelis and Arabs were in a war and losers generally should thank God or praise Allah that they are still alive). However, Article 11, actually states that refugees wishing to return to their homes may do so as long as they live in peace with their neighbors. It seems to me, Rich, that the Palestinians have a long, long, long way to go before they decide to show Israel that they want to live in peace. Anyway, the implementation of resolution 194 is in the hands of the Palestinians.

Look my friend, here’s the reality. Israel exists….plain and simple. Trying to think ourselves back to the days that preceded 1947 just won’t achieve anything. Those days are gone. So how can the Palestinians achieve a peace? How can the Palestinians begin to change their conditions of squalor and substandard living in which they live today? It only seems to make sense that they accept the land that Israel has offered. Then and only then will they be able to start living and looking after the welfare of their children instead of strapping bombs on them.

When I asked you about whether the Palestinians are the pawns of the Arab countries, your response was, “how the hell should I know?” Clearly, you have either ignored or refused to acknowledge the deceit, selfishness and hateful influence seeded by the Arab political machine for which they have urinated onto their “poor brothers and sisters (Talk about your statement monstrous crimes against humanity!).” As such, you are not considering a major, if not the predominating, influence within the Middle East. Therefore, what you have proposed as your simple solution (from previous posts), is based on a partially built foundation. As such, anything constructed on top of it would merely come crashing down and crumble to pieces.

It’s time for the Palestinians to take the land which Israel is offering. Having a better life for themselves and their children is in their hands. As such they have control of their own destiny…if they want it. They (including you) need to stop blaming others (Israel) for their condition.

Am Yisrael Chai!
rabrouns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2006, 07:58 AM   #29
Rich Siegel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Posts: 25
monstrous crimes against humanity

It doesn't flow? What kind of word is flow? Do you mean it doesn't follow? doesn't make sense?

Here's a slogan I have on a sweat-shirt that displays the Palestinian flag: "What if someone invaded your home, killed your father, raped your mother, imprisoned your brother, locked you in the backyard in doghouse conditions, called you a terrorist for trying to get your home back, and told you it was God's will?" THIS is how Palestinians view Zionism/Israel, and not, as we are told in popular myth, because they just hate Jews. NO. This is their EXPERIENCE. This is what actually happened to them. Not every one exactly as is described above. But you can be sure that Zionism/Israel has brought tragedy in some way shape or form to every single Palestinian- to an entire society.

You and Art have both been generous enough to state that people have a right to defend their homes. You have said it about Israeli's. Art said it about Americans- in the event that anyone should threaten us- including the absurd scenario of Native Americans reclaiming my house which is on land that they lost 350 years ago. But that is exactly what happened to Palestinians: Jews claimed land that they lost 2,000 years ago, and committed massacre, rape, and mass expulsion to get it. Michael Ohlstein, who doesn't agree with much that I've said, states in his post (below) that he agrees with this. Why is he saying so? Because it's history. It's fact. Not only that- it's an ongoing history. The Palestinians had two exceptionally bad years- 1948 and 1967, but there has been an ongoing program to displace them which was first stated in writing in 1895 and which began implementation in about 1905, and which continues TODAY! Bedouin villages are being destroyed- people being displaced from their homes- TODAY! Gaza is under siege, literally being destroyed TODAY! East Jeruasalem is being Judaized- ethcnically cleansed of Arabs- TODAY! The West Bank is being turned into a series of non-contiguous Arabs ghettos inside a system of Jewish settlements and Jewish-only bypass roads TODAY! Why should Palestinians accept this? Why should they not resist this? Who could possibly accept this? Would you in their shoes? Can to stretch your brain far enough to even ask yourself that question?!

But back to the history: Art made a denigrating statement about revisionist historians- accused me of being a "vegetarian" for being revisionist- which happens to be true- I am mostly vegetarian! But consider: There is an entire generation of Jewish Israeli scholars who have done the research, using primarily de-classified IDF documents to tell us in their books that the myths we were all raised with are false- that Israel was indeed founded with massacre and mass-expulsion- a process which also included a generous amount of rape. And they have also described the history before 1948 and since as being an ongoing program of land-grabbing and ethnic cleansing- very much including the 1967 war. (Who was it said the Arabs started every war? Absurd! The only war which they initiated was 1973, and that was because Israel refused to reliquish the Sinai.) Now- what do we do with that information? Do we sneer at anyone who takes it seriously and call them a "vegetarian"? (I love it- it's so absurd!) Or do we admit- hey- maybe what we were told growing up was not the truth- maybe what I and all my Wel-Met buddies believed when we went to protest Arafat at the UN in 1974 was not the truth. Maybe instead- the Palestinians have a LEGITIMATE COMPLAINT! What do we do with people who have a legitimate complaint? Do we just kill more of them? This seems to be Israel's solution!

Re: your complaint that I stated that I have no idea why certain Arab leaders have certain dispositions towards Palestinian refugees. Sorry, but it's the truth, and you have no idea either. What Arab leaders have you corresponded with lately? And the discussion of how leaders of other Arab countries are dealing with Arab refugees is an irrelevant tangent, a way to deflect the attention away from the real issue.

Another irrelevant tangent that has been brought into the discussion is holocaust revisionism. I know that the holocaust happened because I have photo's of my relatives who were murdered by the Nazi's. In the case of three of my relatives I know exactly how the died, because a fourth family member hid and witnessed the round up of Jews in Czestochowa, Poland. They were taken to a town sqaure and shot. This relative wrote to other relatives in London about what he witnessed once he had escaped into Russia, and then he was never heard from again, so it is a fair assumption that he was murdered as well. The holocaust has been used in a disgraceful way to shake down the governments of Europe. Sounds like an anti-Semitic statement? Read Norman Finkelstein's "The Holocaust Industry". Zionists are even trying to shake down the Spanish government for reparations from the Inquisition 500 years ago! Imagine! This while stealing land from the Palestinians and offering them bubkes. There is a mania of asserting that Jews are the world's worst victims and therefore are above criticism and are entitled to whatever we claim we are entitled to- and it's disgusting. We are turning into a sick cult of victimization and entitlement, and making sure by this behavior that anti-Semitism survives for generations to come.

Whatever anyone is saying about the holocaust is irrelevant to the subject of Zionism's crimes against the Palestinans. However- let's look at what holocaust revisionists are actually claiming: They are claiming that the number 6 million is an exaggeration. They are claiming that there were no gas chambers. They are NOT claiming that Nazi's did not kill Jews in large numbers. I have no opinion on this. Why don't you prove to me that the number 6 million is accurate, and prove to me that there were gas chambers. Now let's take the focus off this tangent and put it back on the subject at hand.

You say that UN resolution 194 has a codicil. Fine. Let Israel implement the resolution and see if the Arabs live up to their requirement. The Arabs cannot live up to their requirement if the resolution is not implemented. Israel is the scofflaw here, not the Palestinians. You say that the Palestinians should take the land that has been offered? What has been offered? There has been no peace negotiation in 6 years. Sharon simply flat-out ended it. And 6 years ago it was Barak who walked away from the table. And what was being offered? What ridiculous compromise were the Palestinians actually seriously considering at that time? A non-contiguous system of ghettos inside a maze of Jewish-only settlements and Jewish-only roads, contained completely within Israeli borders, with Israel controlling everything from water rights to air-space and borders, basically a prison called a Palestinian state in name only.

Am Yisroel my ass.

-Rich Siegel
Rich Siegel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2006, 08:51 AM   #30
Michael Ohlstein
Registered User
 
Michael Ohlstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Old Brookville, NY
Posts: 199
OK......up until now, you've at least presented cogent discussion. Some of that discussion is pretty twisted, but at least it's fairly well put together.

But are you actually suggesting that you don't believe that there were gas chambers? Because if that's the case, I think that we can put this to bed fairly quickly......
Michael Ohlstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Israeli Arab Conflict Docbrett Current Memories Forum 12 07-26-2006 10:44 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.