I'm no fan of the current Israeli government, but I don't see in that Twitter thread anyone "celebrating" the Nakba. The people quoted in it are certainly attempting to leverage the specter of the Nakba to incentivize Palestine to stop killing kids (which we all know is a waste of time, because it's in the Palestinian Arab DNA), but I don't see much of a difference between that and Palestinians constantly bringing up the Holocaust and comparing Jews to Nazis.
I hear you that you're upset about Likud politicians using the Nakba as a threat. You know what I'm upset about? Islamic Jihad firing over a thousands rockets into Israel and getting more people killed. Maybe you can use your platform to speak out against that instead. Seems a bit more of a pressing issue than what Likud "basically" "essentially" "might" do.
& are arabs in 'palestine' throwing the 1st molotov ? yes--i believe that israel targets (yes, with advanced weapons) ONLY after being targeted. & yes, >1000 hits in israel/jerusalem--killing & wounding arab & jew alike
--iseali hospitals take all
--time to SANCTION the arab terrorists: # of times israel was sanctioned ____! # terrorists sanctions = 0️⃣
You think that a "holy" myth excuses it? Are you a primitive?
Theodor Herzl wasn't. He was an atheist, and a racist bigot. I'm fine with that, but I don't pretend he was anything else. See it for what it is. This is a group that claims to be religious, but isn't, it's just a genetic group, through a maternal line. Israel is the most racist nation on the planet today has been since Apartheid South Africa collapsed, and you can see the disaster that created.
Israel isn't interested in a two state solution, they will push until it's untenable, and they'll get crushed. They can create a two state solution TODAY, just declare borders, whatever is left over, that's "Palestine" - but I know they won't. They will continue to push and murder until there's nothing left to lose, and when the US dies, they will die.
They can solve the problem today, but they won't. They are an insane nation.
They “leverage” the Nakba by owning it and boasting. It’s not such a stretch to call boasting a kind of “celebration” in the sense of affirmation. Again, “splitting hairs” – either deny or affirm, and their idea is probably to affirm in a kind of celebratory way rather than squirm somehow under the weight of a feigned conscience.
Again, I don’t see any boasting in that Twitter thread. That sounds like your personal interpretation of what was said rather than what was actually said.
"which we all know is a waste of time, because it's in the Palestinian Arab DNA"
Haha - stop being such a god damned racist. Man. You know who is racist, people that are saying that a biblical myth that people from 2700 years ago gives them a right to a land.
Stop being a bigot.
And by the way, there is a myth of the holocaust as well. I'm sick of it. There were no lampshades made out of jewish skin, there was no soap made out of them. The starving people we all have seen pictures of were starving because the Allies blew up supply lines to slave labor camps, which were making munitions for the Nazis. 6 million Jewish people didn't die, maybe a million, perhaps as much as 2 million. The Nazis were certainly ruthless in eliminating people that couldn't work, but they didn't mindlessly do it. They were slave labor camps.
This is just WWII propaganda to justify the ruthlessness of the Allies, and in war, it's ruthless. There's no good sides in a war, it's just state sanctioned murder. That's what war is. Grow up.
Furthermore, Israel is nothing more than the last European colony. You whine about rockets, pathetic nothing rockets, being fired into Israel. Really? They are invaders, racist, bigots displacing the original inhabitants. You whine and moan about resistance to this. Don't worry, the bigots will win. Gaza will eventually be absorbed into Israel and the West Bank will be as well. There's no chance of a two state solution. The Palestinians will continue to be displaced, and those that refuse, will be killed or placed onto reservations. 70 years tells you the outcome.
Israel has the power to simply declare its borders today, right now, they've had this power for 40 years, and whatever is left over, that's "Palestine", they can do this right now, this moment, but they won't because ALL of Palestine is "Israel". It's a mafia nation.
Interesting. I hadn't followed this development closely. Zionist commenters on this site, who seem to have little better to do with their time, are clearly struggling to justify both the racist, apartheid Israeli state's increasingly far-right rhetoric and, of course, the Nakba itself which they will never acknowledge. The open and obvious facts of history about this appalling (and continuing) atrocity are too much for Zionists to accept, but it is pleasing to note that the rest of the world is not so narrowminded. The anti-Palestinian narrative has become threadbare in its cruelty, so much that even the mainstream US media (though not really the UK media here, as yet) is slowly starting to feature more Palestinian voices and to treat Zionists with more scepticism.
Well, speaking as a Zionist, I feel no obligation to justify either the Israeli state's current rhetoric or the Nakba. If Palestinian supporters feel no responsibility towards Palestine's rhetoric and war crimes of today, much less from 70 years ago, why should I? As a Zionist, I simply believe that the Jewish people have the right to self-determination and statehood in their indigenous homeland. I'm no more obligated to justify Netanyahu's stance on national security than you're obligated to justify the Itamar Massacre.
As for atrocities, some of us are more concerned about the atrocities going on right now than the consequences of Palestine's own actions 70 years ago. Like the hundreds of rockets Islamic Jihad fired into Israel in the last couple weeks. Or the mother and two daughters executed by Palestine in the West Bank for the crime of being Jews. "Cruel"? "Atrocities"? Or perfectly OK because Palestine is the one doing the crimes, not Israel?
Dear anonymous: you are the kid continually pulling hard on the braids of the girl sitting in front of you. She turns around and punches you in the face, and you blubber to the teacher that the girl hurt you. That’s most Israeli Jews in a nutshell. The girl symbolizes the Palestinians, and the pulling of the braid symbolizes: settlers taking over land that the non-Jewish (non-bribed) majority international community firmly understand to be for the Palestinians; withholding water and trade from the OT at will when Israel shuts down the Gaza border; Jewish settler assholes behaving like Gestapo and committing pogroms in Hawari and destroying hundred year old olive orchards all over the West Bank; some Israeli soldiers target shooting any Palestinian who is known to be a good leader for the Palestinians because most Israeli Jews don’t want anything good for the Palestinians; the incredible surveillance system now operating in the OT, particularly in Hebron (everyone should watch the recent Aljazeera 2 part videos on youtube about A.I. surveillance there); and the million ways that most Israeli Jews try to have it all for themselves. They are like Super Predators, who bribe their way into international acceptance. If you truly cared about Israel and its Jews, you would be spending your time, like Peter does, getting them to stop pulling braids.
I at least recognize that there are sociopathic Jews (bad ones) and good Jews. I would never make a blanket declaration about all Jews. You, on the other hand, want to label all Palestinians as terrorists. Whose the anti-semitic racist?
It’s noteworthy that in the 1960s, the ME was pretty secular compared to now. I believe there was a covert strategy by Israel (and the CIA who radicalized the Mujahadeen) to increase Islamization in order to then Judaize Jews and declare that there are irreconcilable differences in the populations, necessitating apartheid.
No, not really. I’m anti-mainstream, and I have read too many books on the CIA and the Mossad, and books by Seymour Hersh and books on mind control, Also I have experienced A.I. remote neural monitoring, hacking of my brain. I have become extremely cynical about the reality that those in power try to present to us. Things are not as they seem. My imagination has been widened and I can conceive possibilities that others don’t. For an introduction into this mindset, I recommend the book, the Devil’s Chessboard, by David Talbot. It will make you cry, the darkness of the human capabilities. It’s primarily about the CIA under Allen Dulles.
It would be foolish to think that what’s happening in the world today is any less nefarious than the things that have been dug up with research, whistleblowers, and FOIAs in history.
Have you noticed, Rebecca, that the Zionist trolls who heckle Peter Beinart usually do not sign their full legal names? They hide behind the anonymity of pseudonyms and lob their ignorant racist opinions as if such opinions constitute civilized discourse. Still, those Jews who value the morality taught by and inherent in their faith, persist.
I believe there are and will always be Jewish ppl of conscience who hate injustice and respect the humanity of non-Jews. To speak out against the longstanding injustice and apartheid system in Israel takes great courage, especially when their own people take them as enemies.
The word "courage" comes from the Latin word "cor" which means "heart." Courage is the ability to do something that frightens one. That ability is connected to the heart as the seat of feelings. Jewish people of conscience, people I call "Real Jews," manifest the spirit of Jewish moral law. It is so basic: it is called The Golden Rule.
Wow Lewis, so Jews who disagree with you are what, fake Jews? Imposter Jews? This is why people think Peter Beinart and his followers are anti-Semitic.
Are moral laws inherent to faiths? I was brought up as a Christian here here in the UK. My parents virtually coerced me into intensive reading of the Bible, which drew my attention to the horrors of immorality which were presented as heroic or merely laudable within its pages. I'm sure you can see where I'm heading: the repeated slaughter of the Canaanites by the Israelites who claimed to be authorised, even commanded, into mass murder because their victims worshipped the wrong (and just as bad, multiple) gods, followed by the theft of their land. This, of course, is the apparently historical basis for the state of Israel, or so Zionists say. I'd be interested in your viewpoint.
I too am a Christian and am nearly finished with my Masters in Public Theology to understand these paradoxes of peace and violence in holy scriptures and how they’re applied in the polis. I started to write some answers for you here, but there’s too much to say in this space. Would you like for me to recommend some accessible resources for you that go over these issues? This is oversimplified, but in short, in every religion you will have different sub-traditions that fall along lines of exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism (and there’s a few more minor streams), also literalist fundamentalism, mystical contemplative, metaphorical, prophetic (by this I mean speaking truth to power, not telling the future as often misinterpreted), etc. Holy Scriptures tend to be symphonic conversations that build on each other and absolutely have to be read as wholes within their own literary, historical, and cultural contexts.The meaning can look quite different when that’s honored rather than cherry picking passages (which if this is done ANYTHING can be justified). The brilliance and beauty of the Hebrew Scriptures, and also sometimes the danger is that the editors left all the voices in there. Many competing against one another. It’s a conversation that builds on itself and leaves all the icky things in as well as the good. This is their genius, and are very honest, human, beautiful, and subversive in this way. The book of Joshua (the one perhaps the most quoted to justify violence) for instance has two authors with contradicting narratives and an editor who came in years later and left it all in there. To me that editor has allowed the reader to see how human thinking about God, themselves, and each other can work and the fruit of different things we tell ourselves about these things. Oh man, there’s way too much to say, but let me know if you’d like for me to throw you some accessible books, lectures, or other resources that discuss these things in a digestible way. This conversation has been debated for thousands of years, but it’s an important conversation to understand the elements of since it effects so much of our world. Wishing you well!!
I left faith behind a long time ago so I'm not the person to ask to re-litigate the questions of theology that you explore here. You would perhaps be more usefully employed convincing those still enamoured of the various supernaturalist faiths that their sacred texts should not be understood as literally true. In the case of the Bible, that is quite a stretch, given the sheer amount of very nasty systems of morality, histories and miraculous occurrences that it contains. Is it any surprise that my late parents, along with millions of other Christians, made that mistake? Or that it took me forty years to break free?
If the Bible/Koran etc. should not be followed without critical moral judgement, on what moral system is that judgement to be made? Committed followers of faith refuse to use other moral systems... or at least they claim they don't. So either we don't need to take any notice of such texts because - by universal, non-religious standards - they are horrible and inspire mass murder, or we simply accept such a hideous moral code.
Of course, we on the Left (and I'm a socialist) must never, ever criticise Islam, as Muslims are always hapless victims and are never perpetrators of anything bad against each other or anyone else. And the Koran is, unlike the Bible from which it is cribbed, strangely beyond reproach. Apparently.
Sounds good about your leaving the faith. I just want to clarify that my comments are in no way meant to defend any sort of faith or coerce anyone into anything concerning any faith. Religious texts and faiths themselves are often misunderstood even by those who claim them and certainly through any sort of pop culture understanding. What I’m attempting to explain in response to your question, and perhaps I’m not doing a very good job, is not to convince anyone to hold a particular view, but to see there are many different views that these texts and traditions hold. We can wish these faith traditions away, but they are there and major motivators in politics and culture whether we like them or not. Actually a friend of mine who was part of The Oslo Accords named this the reason for their ultimate failure... wishing away the religious leaders and not including that dimension. When we’re uncomfortable with things (and there’s definitely some trauma I’m hearing in your experience of being coerced and exposure to violence which scripture is full of is traumatic in and of itself .. so understandably so! Religion has been used to create all kinds of trauma in the world), it is tempting to just not deal with them, but that doesn’t make them go away. In any sort of conflict transformation, what is important is to understand the multi-faceted dynamics at play to best come to a good conclusion without assumption. I’m absolutely not saying you should become religious or learn about religion if that’s not your desire, but your question is about religion and religious texts. So I just wanted to offer you a chance for more nuance on the subject. It is quite nuanced, and growing up in Christendom (again different from Christianity), it also took me 40 years to shake it and re-educate myself because cultural Christianity (at least where I live in America) had taught me so badly and falsely. It put words in Judaism’s mouth that weren’t there as well as in Christianity’s, and Islam’s too. We all can do this to each other when we haven’t taken the time to understand one another, or ourselves for that matter. Please know I’m not coming from a place of trying to convince or coerce, but of empathy and offering a teeny tiny bit of what I’ve learned in response to your question. Your experience rings familiar to my own. So you definitely don’t need to listen to me, but I do think if your questions are sincere and not just accusations, there are real answers out there, and if we do want to understand the multifaceted dynamics in this particular conflict, it’s important to go looking for them.
I’m also glad you’ve broken free and hope that freedom grows and grows for you. I hope that for all of us. A free identity that does not need to belong to a group or rely on outside circumstances to inform one’s identity is key to inner peace and ultimately world peace. We can only give what we have inside. These conflicts are exactly because identities have been tied to nations that “other” people who aren’t in the group. Ironically world religions all in their essence are pathways to keeping that from happening and all religions have historically done the opposite. It is not necessarily the religions in and of themselves, but ALWAYS when the religions combine with The State, capitulate to it for power (and/or “safety”) and religious nationalism occurs is when you get the violent conflicts. Ironically, when studied in depth and full context, ultimately these religious texts are teaching against doing that, though can come across as being for that on the surface.
A quick computer search on "The Golden Rule" reveals that this core concept may be found in all major religious and spiritual systems to some degree. In the case of Judaism, the Babylonian Torah says, "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn." That does not mean that all major religious and spiritual systems actually practice the Golden Rule as you so correctly point out. Nevertheless, the foundation of peace and mutual understanding is there and people of conscience in any faith tradition can build on it.
One of the many reasons I left faith completely was that faith is completely irrelevant to creating a moral code for living. Believers claim they abide by their religion's sacred texts & traditions, but in practice they pick and choose. As do theologians and the other commenters here. On what moral code do any of them base their choices about their faith? It can't be their faith, as that is the code they are assessing. So, if believers use a non-faith moral code to judge their faith's moral code, why use the faith's moral code at all? The faith is clearly inferior to the outer code that all believers use to pick and choose - whether that is nice liberals choosing to ignore the strictures against homosexuality, or fundamentalists ignoring commandments to love our enemies.
I agree with most of what you said. When I used the phrase "faith tradition," I was thinking more about tradition than faith. Religious traditions provide a context for understanding and dealing with the vicissitudes of life (birth, marriage, old age, death). Personally, I make a distinction between religion and spirituality. I am not religious, but I am highly receptive to spirituality and I believe religion has the potential to play a positive role in human development rather than the negative role to which you so correctly alluded.
Lewis, I’ve loved reading your comments and (hope it’s okay) took the opportunity to learn more about you and gave you a google. 😜 I ordered your book which looks wonderful and relates to a space I’m trying to practice more myself. I look forward to learning from you and am so intrigued by you. You’re definitely someone to learn from. I also see you’re in Mount Shasta, which strangely is where my whole relationship with Israel-Palestine began. It’s a crazy story. If you’re interested, I’d love to connect simply because you just seem wonderful. If I wasn’t so far away, I’d invite you for a coffee! Best to you and happy to have found your voice. I look forward to hearing more!
Rebecca, I think this second question you ask here.. the work of M. Scott Peck Four Stages of Spiritual Development (he’s not a theologian or talking about theology, but a psychiatrist who studies the different ways people think about religion and spirituality) that I sent earlier can answer some of these questions for you. ;)
Also in way to short to your original question. Moral laws are inherent to all faiths (but also I think you could argue to all people.. everyone has lines they’re willing to cross or not cross whether they are religious or not). However, moral laws are interpreted quite differently even within a faith. For instance you have religious nationalists in every religion and those who oppose this notion in every religion. You have dualistic and non dualistic understanding of morals within each faith. No one faith is a monolith. For instance, Christendom and Christianity look very very different from each other often. M. Scott Peck’s Four Stages of Spiritual Development (which apparently is a repeat of Dionysius The Younger’s?) explains this in a digestible way. My friend explains it here well if interested. This is part 1 of a four part series:
Not a real person, but 57 lines of SQL code directed at US-based media outlets and indexed to keywords “Israel”, “Palestine”, “Zionism”, and “Beinart” with access to a large database of official government talking points.
No, Peter, 750,000 Arabs were not expelled. The majority of Arabs who left did so voluntarily, driven by various factors such as fear, anticipation, and personal choices. The outbreak of war motivated people to leave their homes, choosing to relocate temporarily until the situation improved. Arab leaders advised Palestinian communities to leave until the Arab armies successfully defeated Israel and many Arabs left, anticipating a short-lived absence.
And yet...most Arabs stayed and today make up 21% of the population of Israel. These Arab-Israeli citizens when polled whether they would become Palestinians should there be a Palestinian state, overwhelmingly say they would remain Israeli.
There is no "right of return". This is a made up term by the Palestinians. The definition of "refugee" applies only to those who were displaced in 1948 and Israel has said they would make accomodations for them. The only reason that after 75 years the Palestinians do not have their own country living in peace next to Israel is Palestinian rejection. For this to change, it's up to the Palestinians to unequivcally state that they 1) support Israel's right to exist; 2) accept their own country living in peace next to Israel; and 3) the only "right of return" is to a new state of Palestine.
All true. All of it, including what it would take for peace. Unfortunately, apologists like yourself don't put the onus on the corrupt Palestinian leaders to change. And they are the ones who are keeping Palestinians in their 75+ year predicament. Not Israel.
Peter, just like you usually do when you talk about the Nakba, you can't remain consistent even within your own piece.
Paragraph 2: [The Nakba is] "the 75th anniversary of the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians between 1947 and 1949. "
Paragraph 4: "So, what Jackie Rosen does is she completely ignores the fact, right, that 750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled in fear."
Which is it, Peter? Were 750,000 Palestinians expelled, or were they partially expelled and partially fled in fear? If you can't even keep your own narrative consistent, why should anyone give any credibility to anything that you're saying?
If many people are forcibly expelled and others see that, and subsequently “flee in fear,” this is the effect, one that is deliberate and admittedly deliberate (documents prove this), of the forcible expulsions and massacres that occurred to terrorize ppl. These hairs won’t split
"The IDF commander of the soldiers who shot her was accused by his comrades and Palestinian witnesses of using automatic fire to deliberately shoot her repeatedly, a subject which was brought into investigation. During trial, he expressed no regret over his actions and said he would have done the same even if the girl was a 3-year-old. His legal team argued that the "confirmation of the kill" after a suspect is shot was a standard Israeli military practice to eliminate terrorist threats. The commander was charged with illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and perverting the course of justice by an Israeli military court but was found not guilty. Human rights groups cite her death as one of several incidents which illustrate a "culture of impunity" in the IDF."
Ridiculously ironic to hear Palestine supporters point fingers about the killing of children. Palestine makes killing of children its national pastime.
It's not anti-Palestinian racism to criticize the state of Palestine any more than it's anti-Semitic to criticize the state of Israel.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International
Am I allowed to not like Palestinian armed groups deliberately targeting civilians and using Palestinian children in armed attacks? Or is that 'anti-Palestinian racism' too?
"During 11 days of fighting this month between Israel and Hamas, at least 67 children under age 18 were killed in Gaza and 2 in Israel, according to initial reports."
From The New York Times, May 26, 2021
"During the 50 days of hostilities lasting from 8 July until 26 August 2014, 2,251 Palestinians were killed; 1,462 of them are believed to be civilians, including 551 children and 299 women."
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International, who freaking hates Israel
Palestine is not a victim, so blaming it for its horrible behavior identified above is not blaming the victim. Palestine is a victimizer, of many, many people, but including its own children. Imagine! Victimizing your OWN CHILDREN. Who could support a country like that? Not me. Not ever.
“ Ridiculously ironic to hear Palestine supporters point fingers about the killing of children. Palestine makes killing of children its national pastime.”
The claim above has been discredited by The New York Times and others, yet Winters, you continue to obfuscate, telling untruths, just like Joan Peters in ‘Time Immemorial.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International
For 75 years since the faithful UN Resolution 181, Palestinians have lived in terror and fear. In the 1948 Nakba, which followed the UN partition resolution, Israel conquered 78% of Palestine and expelled most of its population almost 800,000 people, from their homes, villages and towns. It also made the remainder of the Palestinians still under its control second-class citizens and discriminated against Mizrahi (Arab and Sephardic) Jews in what it defined as a Jewish state – not a state of its citizens; today at least 20% of the citizens of Israel are not Jewish. The Palestinian refugees were never allowed to return home, despite UN Resolution 194 of December 1948, and countless UN resolutions since, affirming their right of return. Today over six million Palestinians and their descendants are refugees into the third generation.
In 1967, the remainder of historic Palestine was occupied by Israel. Every Palestinian in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza has lost his/her human and political rights under a brutal settler-colonial military occupation. After 1967 there followed a fast colonisation project, in violation of international law and the 4th Geneva Convention, of settling Israeli Jews in the newly conquered territories, expelling and dispossessing Palestinians even further.
Israel has since disregarded all UN resolutions demanding it withdraws from the Occupied Territories and has continued to build illegal settlements, roads and army camps. It has continued to suppress brutally and dispossess the Palestinian population under its military rule. Internationally Israel has set up powerful lobbies which have sought to silence the voice of reason among Jews across the world. Domestically it has constructed a highly militarised society, armed-to-teeth with weapons of mass destruction which renders the situation in Palestine-Israel extremely volatile and highly dangerous not only to Palestinians but also Israeli Jews.
Ben-Gurion in 1951: Only Death Penalty Will Deter Jews From Gratuitous Killing of Arabs
'Until a Jewish soldier is hanged for murdering Arabs, these acts of murder won’t end,' Israel’s first prime minister told his stunned cabinet 66 years ago, when Jewish murders of Arabs had become all too common.
I find this concept of denial fascinating. Not just in this situation, but as a human pattern and I’m wondering if anyone can shed more light on this for me psychologically and/or culturally. I agree with what Peter has said here, and I’ve also been looking at this dynamic within my own culture for awhile. I grew up in Alabama and was raised as an Evangelical Conservative and Christian Zionist. I’ve lived in NY for twenty years and would now say I’m none of those things, but I still see denial take shape in The North as well as liberal circles too. I ended up studying theology and the more I studied theology, the more progressive I became and anti-imperialist in any form. All that to say, in these questions and studies of my own American culture(even in different subcultures within the whole), denial keeps coming up... particularly when it comes to the idea of systemic racism (which I think America and Israel share at this point.. though with different particularities). This is not just true in The South, but also true in The North (Long Island is the most racist place I’ve ever lived in for instance) and across the country.
I think it’s really interesting to hear Peter compare Israel’s narrative with America’s, and no surprise America’s takes on more if this concept of denial. I mean it is a dominant trait in American society.. not just with racism, but American Exceptionalism, The American Myth, age, disconnection with our bodies, the earth, so many things.. the list goes on. My question is.. why??
I haven’t finished reading “Albion’s Seed” but anyone who has or has other resources/ideas as to how we have developed this particular trait? What are the roots? We are seeing this at play in other countries like India, Russia.. I mean there’s a lot, but it seems particularly to be a long lived practice and key feature of America. Why is that? Is it mainly about the slave trade and indigenous genocide and colonialism or is it deeper? It seems to me it must be even for those things to have been able to exist! I can talk about this on a theological level, but I want to know more from a material level. Any help?
There is a Zen Buddhist monk named Angel Kyodo Williams who said something really profound about this “apocalypse” (which doesn’t the end of the world.. means “unveiling” end of an age beginning of a new one..every era and individual has one..or a few..haha) America has been experiencing the last number of years. She said what’s being exposed and ending in this current apocalypse is “denial.” Personally, I found that hitting the nail on the head and why we’re seeing a massive political backlash to that. This is also related to Israel-Palestine because American denial empowers that conflict to continue... not just denial about what’s happening, but also denial about our own morality (or lack there of).
So this is a long comment/question, but something I wonder about often and curious if anyone has thoughts/ideas/resources on. Thanks!
Side note: I do recognize that denial makes us “feel” safe, but it’s a clear illusion when we look at the fruit it bears (individually and collectively). Is the feeling of security what this is about? Surely there is something more?
Excellent description of Palestine, the only thing you were wrong about is that I'm not the one defending it, you are.
Nothing to say about Palestine targeting civilians and victimizing its own children? I don't blame you for not responding to it. Palestine is indeed indefensible.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks."
THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS. DELIBERATELY TARGETING ISRAELI CIVILIANS. USING CHILDREN IN ARMED ATTACKS.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International
"I heard Rabbi Kalmanofsky and Eva talk on a recent panel in Chicago and was impressed by their thoughtful and clarifying disagreements."
Thanks Peter, for the link to the Chicago debate. I found it very interesting, and look forward to seeing and hearing next Fridays zoom call with the Rabbi and Eva.
I'm no fan of the current Israeli government, but I don't see in that Twitter thread anyone "celebrating" the Nakba. The people quoted in it are certainly attempting to leverage the specter of the Nakba to incentivize Palestine to stop killing kids (which we all know is a waste of time, because it's in the Palestinian Arab DNA), but I don't see much of a difference between that and Palestinians constantly bringing up the Holocaust and comparing Jews to Nazis.
I hear you that you're upset about Likud politicians using the Nakba as a threat. You know what I'm upset about? Islamic Jihad firing over a thousands rockets into Israel and getting more people killed. Maybe you can use your platform to speak out against that instead. Seems a bit more of a pressing issue than what Likud "basically" "essentially" "might" do.
& are arabs in 'palestine' throwing the 1st molotov ? yes--i believe that israel targets (yes, with advanced weapons) ONLY after being targeted. & yes, >1000 hits in israel/jerusalem--killing & wounding arab & jew alike
--iseali hospitals take all
--time to SANCTION the arab terrorists: # of times israel was sanctioned ____! # terrorists sanctions = 0️⃣
Jews are the invaders.
You think that a "holy" myth excuses it? Are you a primitive?
Theodor Herzl wasn't. He was an atheist, and a racist bigot. I'm fine with that, but I don't pretend he was anything else. See it for what it is. This is a group that claims to be religious, but isn't, it's just a genetic group, through a maternal line. Israel is the most racist nation on the planet today has been since Apartheid South Africa collapsed, and you can see the disaster that created.
Israel isn't interested in a two state solution, they will push until it's untenable, and they'll get crushed. They can create a two state solution TODAY, just declare borders, whatever is left over, that's "Palestine" - but I know they won't. They will continue to push and murder until there's nothing left to lose, and when the US dies, they will die.
They can solve the problem today, but they won't. They are an insane nation.
They “leverage” the Nakba by owning it and boasting. It’s not such a stretch to call boasting a kind of “celebration” in the sense of affirmation. Again, “splitting hairs” – either deny or affirm, and their idea is probably to affirm in a kind of celebratory way rather than squirm somehow under the weight of a feigned conscience.
Again, I don’t see any boasting in that Twitter thread. That sounds like your personal interpretation of what was said rather than what was actually said.
"which we all know is a waste of time, because it's in the Palestinian Arab DNA"
Haha - stop being such a god damned racist. Man. You know who is racist, people that are saying that a biblical myth that people from 2700 years ago gives them a right to a land.
Stop being a bigot.
And by the way, there is a myth of the holocaust as well. I'm sick of it. There were no lampshades made out of jewish skin, there was no soap made out of them. The starving people we all have seen pictures of were starving because the Allies blew up supply lines to slave labor camps, which were making munitions for the Nazis. 6 million Jewish people didn't die, maybe a million, perhaps as much as 2 million. The Nazis were certainly ruthless in eliminating people that couldn't work, but they didn't mindlessly do it. They were slave labor camps.
This is just WWII propaganda to justify the ruthlessness of the Allies, and in war, it's ruthless. There's no good sides in a war, it's just state sanctioned murder. That's what war is. Grow up.
Furthermore, Israel is nothing more than the last European colony. You whine about rockets, pathetic nothing rockets, being fired into Israel. Really? They are invaders, racist, bigots displacing the original inhabitants. You whine and moan about resistance to this. Don't worry, the bigots will win. Gaza will eventually be absorbed into Israel and the West Bank will be as well. There's no chance of a two state solution. The Palestinians will continue to be displaced, and those that refuse, will be killed or placed onto reservations. 70 years tells you the outcome.
Israel has the power to simply declare its borders today, right now, they've had this power for 40 years, and whatever is left over, that's "Palestine", they can do this right now, this moment, but they won't because ALL of Palestine is "Israel". It's a mafia nation.
Interesting. I hadn't followed this development closely. Zionist commenters on this site, who seem to have little better to do with their time, are clearly struggling to justify both the racist, apartheid Israeli state's increasingly far-right rhetoric and, of course, the Nakba itself which they will never acknowledge. The open and obvious facts of history about this appalling (and continuing) atrocity are too much for Zionists to accept, but it is pleasing to note that the rest of the world is not so narrowminded. The anti-Palestinian narrative has become threadbare in its cruelty, so much that even the mainstream US media (though not really the UK media here, as yet) is slowly starting to feature more Palestinian voices and to treat Zionists with more scepticism.
Well, speaking as a Zionist, I feel no obligation to justify either the Israeli state's current rhetoric or the Nakba. If Palestinian supporters feel no responsibility towards Palestine's rhetoric and war crimes of today, much less from 70 years ago, why should I? As a Zionist, I simply believe that the Jewish people have the right to self-determination and statehood in their indigenous homeland. I'm no more obligated to justify Netanyahu's stance on national security than you're obligated to justify the Itamar Massacre.
As for atrocities, some of us are more concerned about the atrocities going on right now than the consequences of Palestine's own actions 70 years ago. Like the hundreds of rockets Islamic Jihad fired into Israel in the last couple weeks. Or the mother and two daughters executed by Palestine in the West Bank for the crime of being Jews. "Cruel"? "Atrocities"? Or perfectly OK because Palestine is the one doing the crimes, not Israel?
Dear anonymous: you are the kid continually pulling hard on the braids of the girl sitting in front of you. She turns around and punches you in the face, and you blubber to the teacher that the girl hurt you. That’s most Israeli Jews in a nutshell. The girl symbolizes the Palestinians, and the pulling of the braid symbolizes: settlers taking over land that the non-Jewish (non-bribed) majority international community firmly understand to be for the Palestinians; withholding water and trade from the OT at will when Israel shuts down the Gaza border; Jewish settler assholes behaving like Gestapo and committing pogroms in Hawari and destroying hundred year old olive orchards all over the West Bank; some Israeli soldiers target shooting any Palestinian who is known to be a good leader for the Palestinians because most Israeli Jews don’t want anything good for the Palestinians; the incredible surveillance system now operating in the OT, particularly in Hebron (everyone should watch the recent Aljazeera 2 part videos on youtube about A.I. surveillance there); and the million ways that most Israeli Jews try to have it all for themselves. They are like Super Predators, who bribe their way into international acceptance. If you truly cared about Israel and its Jews, you would be spending your time, like Peter does, getting them to stop pulling braids.
What is it about Peter Beinart that attracts these deranged anti semitic sociopaths?
I at least recognize that there are sociopathic Jews (bad ones) and good Jews. I would never make a blanket declaration about all Jews. You, on the other hand, want to label all Palestinians as terrorists. Whose the anti-semitic racist?
I have never said all Palestinians are terrorists. Your maniacal comments speak for themselves.
“Killing kids …is in the Palestinian Arab DNA”. Your words, anti-semite.
It’s noteworthy that in the 1960s, the ME was pretty secular compared to now. I believe there was a covert strategy by Israel (and the CIA who radicalized the Mujahadeen) to increase Islamization in order to then Judaize Jews and declare that there are irreconcilable differences in the populations, necessitating apartheid.
Ok you're definitely anti-semitic.
No, not really. I’m anti-mainstream, and I have read too many books on the CIA and the Mossad, and books by Seymour Hersh and books on mind control, Also I have experienced A.I. remote neural monitoring, hacking of my brain. I have become extremely cynical about the reality that those in power try to present to us. Things are not as they seem. My imagination has been widened and I can conceive possibilities that others don’t. For an introduction into this mindset, I recommend the book, the Devil’s Chessboard, by David Talbot. It will make you cry, the darkness of the human capabilities. It’s primarily about the CIA under Allen Dulles.
It would be foolish to think that what’s happening in the world today is any less nefarious than the things that have been dug up with research, whistleblowers, and FOIAs in history.
>1000 hits SINCE may 5...today is may 15
Have you noticed, Rebecca, that the Zionist trolls who heckle Peter Beinart usually do not sign their full legal names? They hide behind the anonymity of pseudonyms and lob their ignorant racist opinions as if such opinions constitute civilized discourse. Still, those Jews who value the morality taught by and inherent in their faith, persist.
I believe there are and will always be Jewish ppl of conscience who hate injustice and respect the humanity of non-Jews. To speak out against the longstanding injustice and apartheid system in Israel takes great courage, especially when their own people take them as enemies.
The word "courage" comes from the Latin word "cor" which means "heart." Courage is the ability to do something that frightens one. That ability is connected to the heart as the seat of feelings. Jewish people of conscience, people I call "Real Jews," manifest the spirit of Jewish moral law. It is so basic: it is called The Golden Rule.
Wow Lewis, so Jews who disagree with you are what, fake Jews? Imposter Jews? This is why people think Peter Beinart and his followers are anti-Semitic.
Are moral laws inherent to faiths? I was brought up as a Christian here here in the UK. My parents virtually coerced me into intensive reading of the Bible, which drew my attention to the horrors of immorality which were presented as heroic or merely laudable within its pages. I'm sure you can see where I'm heading: the repeated slaughter of the Canaanites by the Israelites who claimed to be authorised, even commanded, into mass murder because their victims worshipped the wrong (and just as bad, multiple) gods, followed by the theft of their land. This, of course, is the apparently historical basis for the state of Israel, or so Zionists say. I'd be interested in your viewpoint.
Rebecca,
I too am a Christian and am nearly finished with my Masters in Public Theology to understand these paradoxes of peace and violence in holy scriptures and how they’re applied in the polis. I started to write some answers for you here, but there’s too much to say in this space. Would you like for me to recommend some accessible resources for you that go over these issues? This is oversimplified, but in short, in every religion you will have different sub-traditions that fall along lines of exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism (and there’s a few more minor streams), also literalist fundamentalism, mystical contemplative, metaphorical, prophetic (by this I mean speaking truth to power, not telling the future as often misinterpreted), etc. Holy Scriptures tend to be symphonic conversations that build on each other and absolutely have to be read as wholes within their own literary, historical, and cultural contexts.The meaning can look quite different when that’s honored rather than cherry picking passages (which if this is done ANYTHING can be justified). The brilliance and beauty of the Hebrew Scriptures, and also sometimes the danger is that the editors left all the voices in there. Many competing against one another. It’s a conversation that builds on itself and leaves all the icky things in as well as the good. This is their genius, and are very honest, human, beautiful, and subversive in this way. The book of Joshua (the one perhaps the most quoted to justify violence) for instance has two authors with contradicting narratives and an editor who came in years later and left it all in there. To me that editor has allowed the reader to see how human thinking about God, themselves, and each other can work and the fruit of different things we tell ourselves about these things. Oh man, there’s way too much to say, but let me know if you’d like for me to throw you some accessible books, lectures, or other resources that discuss these things in a digestible way. This conversation has been debated for thousands of years, but it’s an important conversation to understand the elements of since it effects so much of our world. Wishing you well!!
I left faith behind a long time ago so I'm not the person to ask to re-litigate the questions of theology that you explore here. You would perhaps be more usefully employed convincing those still enamoured of the various supernaturalist faiths that their sacred texts should not be understood as literally true. In the case of the Bible, that is quite a stretch, given the sheer amount of very nasty systems of morality, histories and miraculous occurrences that it contains. Is it any surprise that my late parents, along with millions of other Christians, made that mistake? Or that it took me forty years to break free?
If the Bible/Koran etc. should not be followed without critical moral judgement, on what moral system is that judgement to be made? Committed followers of faith refuse to use other moral systems... or at least they claim they don't. So either we don't need to take any notice of such texts because - by universal, non-religious standards - they are horrible and inspire mass murder, or we simply accept such a hideous moral code.
Of course, we on the Left (and I'm a socialist) must never, ever criticise Islam, as Muslims are always hapless victims and are never perpetrators of anything bad against each other or anyone else. And the Koran is, unlike the Bible from which it is cribbed, strangely beyond reproach. Apparently.
Hey Rebecca,
Sounds good about your leaving the faith. I just want to clarify that my comments are in no way meant to defend any sort of faith or coerce anyone into anything concerning any faith. Religious texts and faiths themselves are often misunderstood even by those who claim them and certainly through any sort of pop culture understanding. What I’m attempting to explain in response to your question, and perhaps I’m not doing a very good job, is not to convince anyone to hold a particular view, but to see there are many different views that these texts and traditions hold. We can wish these faith traditions away, but they are there and major motivators in politics and culture whether we like them or not. Actually a friend of mine who was part of The Oslo Accords named this the reason for their ultimate failure... wishing away the religious leaders and not including that dimension. When we’re uncomfortable with things (and there’s definitely some trauma I’m hearing in your experience of being coerced and exposure to violence which scripture is full of is traumatic in and of itself .. so understandably so! Religion has been used to create all kinds of trauma in the world), it is tempting to just not deal with them, but that doesn’t make them go away. In any sort of conflict transformation, what is important is to understand the multi-faceted dynamics at play to best come to a good conclusion without assumption. I’m absolutely not saying you should become religious or learn about religion if that’s not your desire, but your question is about religion and religious texts. So I just wanted to offer you a chance for more nuance on the subject. It is quite nuanced, and growing up in Christendom (again different from Christianity), it also took me 40 years to shake it and re-educate myself because cultural Christianity (at least where I live in America) had taught me so badly and falsely. It put words in Judaism’s mouth that weren’t there as well as in Christianity’s, and Islam’s too. We all can do this to each other when we haven’t taken the time to understand one another, or ourselves for that matter. Please know I’m not coming from a place of trying to convince or coerce, but of empathy and offering a teeny tiny bit of what I’ve learned in response to your question. Your experience rings familiar to my own. So you definitely don’t need to listen to me, but I do think if your questions are sincere and not just accusations, there are real answers out there, and if we do want to understand the multifaceted dynamics in this particular conflict, it’s important to go looking for them.
I’m also glad you’ve broken free and hope that freedom grows and grows for you. I hope that for all of us. A free identity that does not need to belong to a group or rely on outside circumstances to inform one’s identity is key to inner peace and ultimately world peace. We can only give what we have inside. These conflicts are exactly because identities have been tied to nations that “other” people who aren’t in the group. Ironically world religions all in their essence are pathways to keeping that from happening and all religions have historically done the opposite. It is not necessarily the religions in and of themselves, but ALWAYS when the religions combine with The State, capitulate to it for power (and/or “safety”) and religious nationalism occurs is when you get the violent conflicts. Ironically, when studied in depth and full context, ultimately these religious texts are teaching against doing that, though can come across as being for that on the surface.
A quick computer search on "The Golden Rule" reveals that this core concept may be found in all major religious and spiritual systems to some degree. In the case of Judaism, the Babylonian Torah says, "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn." That does not mean that all major religious and spiritual systems actually practice the Golden Rule as you so correctly point out. Nevertheless, the foundation of peace and mutual understanding is there and people of conscience in any faith tradition can build on it.
One of the many reasons I left faith completely was that faith is completely irrelevant to creating a moral code for living. Believers claim they abide by their religion's sacred texts & traditions, but in practice they pick and choose. As do theologians and the other commenters here. On what moral code do any of them base their choices about their faith? It can't be their faith, as that is the code they are assessing. So, if believers use a non-faith moral code to judge their faith's moral code, why use the faith's moral code at all? The faith is clearly inferior to the outer code that all believers use to pick and choose - whether that is nice liberals choosing to ignore the strictures against homosexuality, or fundamentalists ignoring commandments to love our enemies.
I agree with most of what you said. When I used the phrase "faith tradition," I was thinking more about tradition than faith. Religious traditions provide a context for understanding and dealing with the vicissitudes of life (birth, marriage, old age, death). Personally, I make a distinction between religion and spirituality. I am not religious, but I am highly receptive to spirituality and I believe religion has the potential to play a positive role in human development rather than the negative role to which you so correctly alluded.
Lewis, I’ve loved reading your comments and (hope it’s okay) took the opportunity to learn more about you and gave you a google. 😜 I ordered your book which looks wonderful and relates to a space I’m trying to practice more myself. I look forward to learning from you and am so intrigued by you. You’re definitely someone to learn from. I also see you’re in Mount Shasta, which strangely is where my whole relationship with Israel-Palestine began. It’s a crazy story. If you’re interested, I’d love to connect simply because you just seem wonderful. If I wasn’t so far away, I’d invite you for a coffee! Best to you and happy to have found your voice. I look forward to hearing more!
Rebecca, I think this second question you ask here.. the work of M. Scott Peck Four Stages of Spiritual Development (he’s not a theologian or talking about theology, but a psychiatrist who studies the different ways people think about religion and spirituality) that I sent earlier can answer some of these questions for you. ;)
Also in way to short to your original question. Moral laws are inherent to all faiths (but also I think you could argue to all people.. everyone has lines they’re willing to cross or not cross whether they are religious or not). However, moral laws are interpreted quite differently even within a faith. For instance you have religious nationalists in every religion and those who oppose this notion in every religion. You have dualistic and non dualistic understanding of morals within each faith. No one faith is a monolith. For instance, Christendom and Christianity look very very different from each other often. M. Scott Peck’s Four Stages of Spiritual Development (which apparently is a repeat of Dionysius The Younger’s?) explains this in a digestible way. My friend explains it here well if interested. This is part 1 of a four part series:
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/naming-the-real/id1556564234?i=1000550585315
Also, this book is excellent at unpacking Peace and Violence (and I think will answer your question) in world religions.
https://themaydan.com/2019/01/book-review-peacemaking-challenge-violence-world-religions-irfan-omar-michael-k-duffey-eds-reviewed-chris-gooding/
Hasbara Bot GPT.
Not a real person, but 57 lines of SQL code directed at US-based media outlets and indexed to keywords “Israel”, “Palestine”, “Zionism”, and “Beinart” with access to a large database of official government talking points.
(C’mon. Just teasing)
No, Peter, 750,000 Arabs were not expelled. The majority of Arabs who left did so voluntarily, driven by various factors such as fear, anticipation, and personal choices. The outbreak of war motivated people to leave their homes, choosing to relocate temporarily until the situation improved. Arab leaders advised Palestinian communities to leave until the Arab armies successfully defeated Israel and many Arabs left, anticipating a short-lived absence.
And yet...most Arabs stayed and today make up 21% of the population of Israel. These Arab-Israeli citizens when polled whether they would become Palestinians should there be a Palestinian state, overwhelmingly say they would remain Israeli.
There is no "right of return". This is a made up term by the Palestinians. The definition of "refugee" applies only to those who were displaced in 1948 and Israel has said they would make accomodations for them. The only reason that after 75 years the Palestinians do not have their own country living in peace next to Israel is Palestinian rejection. For this to change, it's up to the Palestinians to unequivcally state that they 1) support Israel's right to exist; 2) accept their own country living in peace next to Israel; and 3) the only "right of return" is to a new state of Palestine.
Yes, and George Washington chopped down the cherry tree but had too much integrity and strong moral fiber to lie about it.
These pleasant persistent confessions of faith we tell ourselves (and anyone who will listen) over and over and over again..
All true. All of it, including what it would take for peace. Unfortunately, apologists like yourself don't put the onus on the corrupt Palestinian leaders to change. And they are the ones who are keeping Palestinians in their 75+ year predicament. Not Israel.
Peter, just like you usually do when you talk about the Nakba, you can't remain consistent even within your own piece.
Paragraph 2: [The Nakba is] "the 75th anniversary of the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians between 1947 and 1949. "
Paragraph 4: "So, what Jackie Rosen does is she completely ignores the fact, right, that 750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled in fear."
Which is it, Peter? Were 750,000 Palestinians expelled, or were they partially expelled and partially fled in fear? If you can't even keep your own narrative consistent, why should anyone give any credibility to anything that you're saying?
If many people are forcibly expelled and others see that, and subsequently “flee in fear,” this is the effect, one that is deliberate and admittedly deliberate (documents prove this), of the forcible expulsions and massacres that occurred to terrorize ppl. These hairs won’t split
How many were forcibly expelled? Do you even know?
If others 'fled in fear', it's a lie to say they were expelled. I know the truth doesn't matter to Palestine, but it does to the rest of us.
... the land was given to the Jew not by the Jews. As prophesied
A nation was built in one day ...
should the nation have incorporated the Arabs fairly... absolutely
How does one do that with a fascist head of state ?
LEST WE FORGET
Peter. Looking forward to Friday, If Not Now is an amazing effort and is the future.
The Nakba is truly ongoing event. Here is what I wrote a few days ago as Gaza was being bombed by the "most moral army in the world.".
Don’t cry for me. Cry for yourselves.
(By Sam Bahour)
https://sbahour.medium.com/dont-cry-for-me-cry-for-yourselves-d3aa1ed58e64?sk=697246c9d08451251e996634ad05e672
"The IDF commander of the soldiers who shot her was accused by his comrades and Palestinian witnesses of using automatic fire to deliberately shoot her repeatedly, a subject which was brought into investigation. During trial, he expressed no regret over his actions and said he would have done the same even if the girl was a 3-year-old. His legal team argued that the "confirmation of the kill" after a suspect is shot was a standard Israeli military practice to eliminate terrorist threats. The commander was charged with illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and perverting the course of justice by an Israeli military court but was found not guilty. Human rights groups cite her death as one of several incidents which illustrate a "culture of impunity" in the IDF."
State terrorism Sam.
Ridiculously ironic to hear Palestine supporters point fingers about the killing of children. Palestine makes killing of children its national pastime.
You have some serious anti-Palestinian racism that you need to look into. It's honestly disturbing and painful to see.
It's not anti-Palestinian racism to criticize the state of Palestine any more than it's anti-Semitic to criticize the state of Israel.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International
Am I allowed to not like Palestinian armed groups deliberately targeting civilians and using Palestinian children in armed attacks? Or is that 'anti-Palestinian racism' too?
"During 11 days of fighting this month between Israel and Hamas, at least 67 children under age 18 were killed in Gaza and 2 in Israel, according to initial reports."
From The New York Times, May 26, 2021
"During the 50 days of hostilities lasting from 8 July until 26 August 2014, 2,251 Palestinians were killed; 1,462 of them are believed to be civilians, including 551 children and 299 women."
Blaiming the victim’s, Winters.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International, who freaking hates Israel
Palestine is not a victim, so blaming it for its horrible behavior identified above is not blaming the victim. Palestine is a victimizer, of many, many people, but including its own children. Imagine! Victimizing your OWN CHILDREN. Who could support a country like that? Not me. Not ever.
“ Ridiculously ironic to hear Palestine supporters point fingers about the killing of children. Palestine makes killing of children its national pastime.”
The claim above has been discredited by The New York Times and others, yet Winters, you continue to obfuscate, telling untruths, just like Joan Peters in ‘Time Immemorial.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International
Don't worry Sam, no one's crying for you. I've used up all my sympathy on Palestine's victims.
For 75 years since the faithful UN Resolution 181, Palestinians have lived in terror and fear. In the 1948 Nakba, which followed the UN partition resolution, Israel conquered 78% of Palestine and expelled most of its population almost 800,000 people, from their homes, villages and towns. It also made the remainder of the Palestinians still under its control second-class citizens and discriminated against Mizrahi (Arab and Sephardic) Jews in what it defined as a Jewish state – not a state of its citizens; today at least 20% of the citizens of Israel are not Jewish. The Palestinian refugees were never allowed to return home, despite UN Resolution 194 of December 1948, and countless UN resolutions since, affirming their right of return. Today over six million Palestinians and their descendants are refugees into the third generation.
In 1967, the remainder of historic Palestine was occupied by Israel. Every Palestinian in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza has lost his/her human and political rights under a brutal settler-colonial military occupation. After 1967 there followed a fast colonisation project, in violation of international law and the 4th Geneva Convention, of settling Israeli Jews in the newly conquered territories, expelling and dispossessing Palestinians even further.
Israel has since disregarded all UN resolutions demanding it withdraws from the Occupied Territories and has continued to build illegal settlements, roads and army camps. It has continued to suppress brutally and dispossess the Palestinian population under its military rule. Internationally Israel has set up powerful lobbies which have sought to silence the voice of reason among Jews across the world. Domestically it has constructed a highly militarised society, armed-to-teeth with weapons of mass destruction which renders the situation in Palestine-Israel extremely volatile and highly dangerous not only to Palestinians but also Israeli Jews.
Palestine bot GPT.
Ben-Gurion in 1951: Only Death Penalty Will Deter Jews From Gratuitous Killing of Arabs
'Until a Jewish soldier is hanged for murdering Arabs, these acts of murder won’t end,' Israel’s first prime minister told his stunned cabinet 66 years ago, when Jewish murders of Arabs had become all too common.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2016-04-01/ty-article/.premium/ben-gurion-only-death-penalty-will-stop-soldiers-from-murdering-arabs/0000017f-f98c-d880-a7ff-ff8c6f7b0000
Abbas in 2023: Cash Cash Money Will Ensure Arabs Gratuitous Killing of Jews.
I find this concept of denial fascinating. Not just in this situation, but as a human pattern and I’m wondering if anyone can shed more light on this for me psychologically and/or culturally. I agree with what Peter has said here, and I’ve also been looking at this dynamic within my own culture for awhile. I grew up in Alabama and was raised as an Evangelical Conservative and Christian Zionist. I’ve lived in NY for twenty years and would now say I’m none of those things, but I still see denial take shape in The North as well as liberal circles too. I ended up studying theology and the more I studied theology, the more progressive I became and anti-imperialist in any form. All that to say, in these questions and studies of my own American culture(even in different subcultures within the whole), denial keeps coming up... particularly when it comes to the idea of systemic racism (which I think America and Israel share at this point.. though with different particularities). This is not just true in The South, but also true in The North (Long Island is the most racist place I’ve ever lived in for instance) and across the country.
I think it’s really interesting to hear Peter compare Israel’s narrative with America’s, and no surprise America’s takes on more if this concept of denial. I mean it is a dominant trait in American society.. not just with racism, but American Exceptionalism, The American Myth, age, disconnection with our bodies, the earth, so many things.. the list goes on. My question is.. why??
I haven’t finished reading “Albion’s Seed” but anyone who has or has other resources/ideas as to how we have developed this particular trait? What are the roots? We are seeing this at play in other countries like India, Russia.. I mean there’s a lot, but it seems particularly to be a long lived practice and key feature of America. Why is that? Is it mainly about the slave trade and indigenous genocide and colonialism or is it deeper? It seems to me it must be even for those things to have been able to exist! I can talk about this on a theological level, but I want to know more from a material level. Any help?
There is a Zen Buddhist monk named Angel Kyodo Williams who said something really profound about this “apocalypse” (which doesn’t the end of the world.. means “unveiling” end of an age beginning of a new one..every era and individual has one..or a few..haha) America has been experiencing the last number of years. She said what’s being exposed and ending in this current apocalypse is “denial.” Personally, I found that hitting the nail on the head and why we’re seeing a massive political backlash to that. This is also related to Israel-Palestine because American denial empowers that conflict to continue... not just denial about what’s happening, but also denial about our own morality (or lack there of).
So this is a long comment/question, but something I wonder about often and curious if anyone has thoughts/ideas/resources on. Thanks!
Side note: I do recognize that denial makes us “feel” safe, but it’s a clear illusion when we look at the fruit it bears (individually and collectively). Is the feeling of security what this is about? Surely there is something more?
Thank you Peter. The comments prove the value of what you have said here.
Great video as usual.
You are defending a racist, apartheid state that murders women and children, good luck with that.
Excellent description of Palestine, the only thing you were wrong about is that I'm not the one defending it, you are.
Nothing to say about Palestine targeting civilians and victimizing its own children? I don't blame you for not responding to it. Palestine is indeed indefensible.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks."
THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS. DELIBERATELY TARGETING ISRAELI CIVILIANS. USING CHILDREN IN ARMED ATTACKS.
THIS. IS. PALESTINE.
Man shut up.
"Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly shown total disregard for the most fundamental human rights, notably the right to life, by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and by using Palestinian children in armed attacks." - Amnesty International
"I heard Rabbi Kalmanofsky and Eva talk on a recent panel in Chicago and was impressed by their thoughtful and clarifying disagreements."
Thanks Peter, for the link to the Chicago debate. I found it very interesting, and look forward to seeing and hearing next Fridays zoom call with the Rabbi and Eva.