Start A Petition

Exposing The Zionist Nonsense to Bring Peace to the Middle East

World  (tags: Jon Voight, Sara El-Yafi, peace, Middle, East, Israel, Palestine, Israeli, lies, prpoganda, 1948, 1967, Balfour, declaration, UN, partition, plan, only, democracy, Hamas, occupation )

- 1718 days ago -
The inaccuracies of the Zionist narrative presented in a compact form.


We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Angelika R (143)
Monday September 8, 2014, 12:40 pm
WOW-Sara El-Yafi, Lebanese Harvard graduate- one name to remember and to look out for more from her!
No doubt one of the best letters written on this topic!
Thanks so much Sam!
I'm experiencing severe hardware issues, battery runs out and unable to recharge for some unknown hardware error it seems, will hopefully return later to add more.

. (0)
Monday September 8, 2014, 1:02 pm
IMO: amazingly rational and sensible -- methinks i can er agree to and advocate most if not all points made there. If THESE had been propagandized half as much as the naZinoiist garbage the world gets inundated in, things might or likely would look completely different in the "ME".


Anteater A (122)
Monday September 8, 2014, 1:02 pm
noted, thank you

Evelyn B (63)
Monday September 8, 2014, 1:30 pm
A great article - congratulations for sharing it, Sam! I'll be sharing it on!

Particularly appreciated :
"There is no way around this truth: the road to Israel's security runs through Arab hearts, and the road to Palestinian liberation runs through Jewish hearts. And such an understanding will only happen once we stop choosing to see a humanitarian crisis based on whether we like the nation that is enduring it or not. There is no ethnicity to suffering. The more we delay this understanding, the more we delay peacemaking and democratic state building. No one wins. "

Kathleen M (208)
Monday September 8, 2014, 1:46 pm
Noted. Thanks for posting this very cogent article, Sam! Sara El-Yafi is definitely someone to keep an eye on...

Past Member (0)
Monday September 8, 2014, 1:49 pm
From the article: The illegal Israeli occupation began decades before Hamas was even born and, therefore, saying the Israeli occupation is contingent upon disarming Hamas is hypocritical. The Israeli occupation is not a product of Hamas; it is Hamas that is a product of the Israeli occupation. Peace is not provisional to Hamas' disarmament; it is provisional to ending the Israeli occupation as well as Hamas' disarmament. There is no way around it. Preaching peace to Palestinians without mentioning the Israeli occupation is like asking them to stay dry while they sit in a lake. It is physically impossible.

It is up to Israel to create the conditions for peace by lifting the blockade of Gaza and relinquishing the settlements on the West Bank. I am coming to think that the only solution is a one state solution, where Palestinians do have the "right of return" and the Jewish people of Israel will have to share the land with others who are not of their religious background. I agree that a 'democracy' which excludes everyone not of the Jewish faith cannot be a true democracy. I'm currently reading Ali Abunimah's book: " The Battle for Palestine', which gives a very eloquent explanation of why a one state solution is the only path to justice. I thought the points expressed in #3 were especially important-- all in all an excellent article full of the central facts of the situation, and one I will keep in my files for future reference. Thanks Sam.

Freya H (345)
Monday September 8, 2014, 2:45 pm
#8: Stop playing the Holocaust card. Listen, we are all sorry about - and horrified by - that ultimate evil; but that cannot even begin to justify Israel's atrocities against the Palestinians. What a shame that Jews are indulging in the same sort of ethnic cleansing that has been inflicted on them in years and centuries past.

Past Member (0)
Monday September 8, 2014, 2:50 pm
Thought it was a great sensible piece...but they'll never be peace as long as Israel occupies the country+how about all the land grabs+settlements on current Palestinian soil....but i'm no more optimistic now than before reading this article. Thanks Sam

Carol F (121)
Monday September 8, 2014, 6:45 pm
wow has this young man ever know his Stuff. He sure tells Voight & with eloquence . I like his solution of getting renderd Hama's useless alone with the Islamic State, I am pretty sure given a chance they can join hands & walk into peace.
It might be wishful hoping !!!!

Rose B (141)
Monday September 8, 2014, 10:13 pm
I agree with Freya

Eleonora O (37)
Monday September 8, 2014, 10:51 pm

Sam - you are a gem ... in finding this jewel!!!! GS on its way! There are some more details I'll add but have to run to "catch the day" - but rest assured I'll be back tonight (my time).

Great rebuttal by Sara el Yafi, who is a great young lady of and by which we sure will read more!


Past Member (0)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 1:52 am
Noted thanks ... a very articulate writer.

Maria Teresa S (42)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 3:49 am
Sara El-Yafi, extraordinary woman!
From te article - It is neither Zionist, nor Islamists that will make peace in the Middle Eat, for neither of them can ever understand the pains of those who look different to them. Rather, it is people like my Jewish and Arab friends who can and will lead their nations to peace, because both condemn all violence, both condemn the huge illegal Israeli settlements, and both believe that the only way to sustainable peace is when Palestinians and Israelis live as equal citizens together, on the same land with dignity and mutual respect.
Excellent article. Thank you Sam for sharing.

Sandra P (135)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 4:47 am
great article, thank you, Eleonora.

Margaret G (243)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 4:51 am
Thank you for the article!

I'm not so sure that a one-state solution would work. Jews would be in the minority. Palestinians are human beings who could quite understandably wish to wreak revenge for the wrongs visited upon them.

Abo r (107)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 5:22 am
noted, thank you Sam for posting and hank you, Eleonora. for forwarding
The IDF always put obsticles for the peace talks since Oslaw and put claims and attacks on daily basis palestinians in West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza .
Above all refused the Arabs initiative for peace too.

Abo r (107)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 5:27 am
The IDF aim to steal all the historical palestine and te neibour Arabs countries to form its empire thats why always attacks arab countries kill humans hoping will find a land without people which will never happen.
If do not want 2 stae solution which is rejected by the IDF in reality and just claims he wants it , IDF should think of THE ONE STATE SOLUTION and live in peace love with all palestinians .

Evelyn B (63)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 5:54 am
Ros - The big constraint on a "One State" solution is if that State is defined as a "Jewish" State ... the demographic questions undermines this being democratic .... since even now Palestinians constitute 25% of the (Jewish) State of Israel .... Add all the Palestinians on WB, East Jerusalem & Gaza, and the "majority" won't BE Jewish ... Even less so if the "Right of Return" were equitably applied ... to Palestinians who have been (forceably) absent for under a century & many with only a Palestinian identity, as well as to anyone of Jewish extraction - & away for many centuries, with other national identities. The Zionists just don't want such a situation, so will oppose the One State solution with all the resources they can muster ... including their mastery of fear-mongering & propaganda ...

IF they could be persuaded to accept a State that is homeland to Jews AND those others of the land - with absolutely equal rights to all .... true peace might be forged. The challenge is huge ...

But then, so is an equitable and manageable two state solution ... because the whole cutting up of Occupied Palestine would have to be ironed out, .... and major efforts to control extremist settlers would have to be exerted ...

The one certain thing is that continued occupation and oppression (including blockades of Gaza, land grabs etc) WON'T allow any peace and security to be implanted & sustainable ............

Lona G (66)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 6:37 am
Thank you very much for posting this article, Sam. I don't do this very often, but I kept this Sara Sara El-Yafi's article for future reference and to share. Every one of her points is well researched and irrefutable. One may or may not agree with her solution (or rather, hope) of a one-state Israel where Jews and Arabs, people of all denominations live together in peace, her conclusion that "There is no ethnicity to suffering. The more we delay this understanding, the more we delay peacemaking and democratic state building. No one wins." is so true and the diamond we should all take away from her rebuttal of John Voight's letter.

Past Member (0)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 7:40 am
Excellent article....peace is the only answer and the only way peace can come about is for everyone to accept their differences and work together.

jan b (5)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 9:38 am
The term “Zionism” was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum. Its general definition means the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel
The Jews lived in that land since the time of Moses and despite some upsets from the Assyrians and Babylonians, remained in the land for many centuries until the Romans displaced them. Prince Titus destroyed the temple in 70 AD. Then in the second century, Emperor Hadrian crushed a new Jewish rebellion. This time, many of the Jews were banished and others were made slaves of the Romans.

A small number of Jews did stay in the land and remained there right up through the twentieth century. However, the name of the land at this time was changed because Hadrian wanted to destroy Jewish identity. He renamed the land “Syria-Palestinia.” Palestinia was a Latin version of the word Philistine, an ancient enemy of the Jews who were now extinct as a people.

Hadrian was deliberately insulting the Jews.

There has never been a country called Palestine. This was a nickname for the Holy Land under the Romans. The people who today call themselves Palestinians are Arabs and they referred to themselves as Arabs for centuries until they were dubbed “Palestinians” as a publicity ploy by the terrorist and founder of the PLO, Yassir Arafat, who himself did not use the title “Palestinian” until after the year 1964.

NOW that it's should be CLEAR the jews do belong in the middle east. First the ARABS (I mean Palestine) were led by Yassir Arafat ( a fine gentleman -cough-cough) Then they elected HAMAS a religious terrorist group with a Charter to destroy the jews like it was done around 70 AD. But the jews are STAYING because they have the power now and means to defend themselves. It's up to the rest of the neighboring countries to stop their hate.

Marc P (50)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 2:02 pm
What a brilliant, and elegantly stated dissertation! It is completely refreshing to actually see an OBJECTIVE viewpoint illustrated here! It is amazing what one can do using the power of FACTS rather than slanted, one sided propaganda that is so rife in my country. We need to independently attempt to spread messages like this to the masses despite our corporate Government owned media.

Marc P (50)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 2:09 pm
Jan b.: People belong everywhere, and no religious priority should hold sway to Freedom. And while Palestinians electing Hamas may not have been a good thing, it was driven by the occupation. EVERY excuse, every finger of blame pointed, every advocate for Israeli aggression in the mid east completely ignores its direct cause. IT IS THE OCCUPATION and expansionist policies of Israel. That is the root. That is the cause. Remedy that bit of crime under International Law and progress toward peace will be swift and progressive.

Angelika R (143)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 4:07 pm
Back on a brand new machine after my laptop broke down yesterday.
Thanks for all the great comments here and one essential message of Ms el-Yafi's wonderful letter was already spotlighted by Evelyn, repeated by Lona, thanks!
I was especially glad that she did give history thoroughly and correct in every way! Including a hint to the ongoing debate about that "homeland" thing in the Balfour declaration.
The stuff Mr Voight fabricated there was adding one miscarriage to an existing one in regard of that "birth".

Angelika R (143)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 4:11 pm
Needless to point out that once more Dr Masri's intense emphasis of cultural boycott of Hollywood comes to mind

Angelika R (143)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 4:13 pm
btw-these sex "recommendations" by Care2 weren't there yesterday..-? is this new or just my new laptop?

Stephen B (23)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 9:35 pm
Some of the statements in this article are rarely recognized truths, but the conclusions it draws from them are generally false:

1 - 3: It's not pretty, but the military control of territory, combined with sufficient diplomatic ties to engage in diplomacy is actually the legal basis of statehood. The U.N. cannot give territory, nor could even the Balfour Declaration. It can only be claimed, exactly as it was in 1948. The non-recognition by a couple blocs in the U.N. amounted to limiting the diplomatic ties, but it was insufficient to prevent engagement in global diplomacy. (International law is about preventing war and saving lives, not some group's idea of justice which those upon whose compliance the laws depend would all dispute.) Also, the 55% vs. 7% is just silly: That was 7% of the total land being privately owned by Jews. Check how much of the total land of any county is private property. Canada is a pretty extreme example, but only about 9.7% of the country is privately owned by anyone.

4: Resolution 242 cites an "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" ... which doesn't actually appear anywhere in international law. In fact, the opposite was accepted: The traditional enforcement-measure for "Do not start wars" is that any losses suffered by the first party to commit acts of war are to be accepted by the international community in post-war agreements. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria certainly did not fire the first shots, but there was a military alliance made for the explicit purpose of attacking Israel, and the explicit statement of intent there amounted to a declaration of war (along with at least half a dozen other explicit unambiguous declarations of intent to attack by Nasser). Here was the standing relevant law of the time:
Note that the assurance of territorial integrity in Article 15 is limited only to stand with regard to the sanctions proposed, not the direct results of war. Conquest by the aggrieved state, of up to and including the entire territory of the aggressor, is legal. The UNSC doesn't have the power to make up international law any more than the General Assembly gets to dictate who gets what land. It especially doesn't have the power to effectively legalize international military aggression by outlawing enforcement-measures against it.

5. Israel is 80% Jewish. That's not even close to mono-ethnic by the standards of, well, anywhere. Canada is, by survey, 67.3% Christian, but the bulk of its 23.9% "non-religious" group is culturally Christian. Canada is more mono-ethnic than Israel. Saudi Arabia is 97% Islamic. Iran is 98%. Both of those countries have unelected heads of state who can veto anything produced by the elected governments. No, Israel is very different from Iran and Saudi Arabia. That said, Israel does have some special treatment for Jews, but that is generally in terms of immigration and the draft. It's apparently the only place on Earth where getting drafted is somehow a privilege. That said, Lebanon is also relatively democratic. :)

6: The trouble with shunning the Israeli occupation of Gaza is, first, that Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005. More broadly, the problem with shunning Israeli control over its borders is, well, obvious. Even more broadly, though, the problem with shunning the blockade in the Mediterranean is that Israel is stuck in something close to a zero-sum game with the Palestinian militias: Weakening Israeli military control means strengthening the militias. It seems morally inconsistent to oppose one and not the other, but it's logically inconsistent to oppose both because one's loss is, in a very real sense, the other's gain. It's like saying both people on the seesaw should let the other go up at the same time because everybody deserves the view from above. It is, as the article says, physically impossible.

7: Ultimately, the article is right. I have seen at least half a dozen different definitions of Zionism, and for at least some of them, point #7 in the article, the most important, central, point of all, is absolutely correct. I would argue that ending the conflict is a whole lot tougher than the author makes it out to be, that everybody could be well-intended and the guns would keep firing, but in general, this point, the really important one, is right. Consider that this comes from someone who strongly disagreed with the first six.

Abo r (107)
Tuesday September 9, 2014, 10:41 pm
Margaret...Rose G, it is known to all that when there is a problem between 2 or a disease or or or we must look at the cause of the disease for example and treat it ( if a person has headach we must not give 2 tabs of aspirin or paracetamol or any analgesic as by these tabs headach will disappear for a moment and return back ) we must check what is causing headach and treat it treat the roots of the problem otherwise will continuoe suffering as he might have brain problem or eye problem or hypertension or even constipation so need to treat the cause of the headach, also if a person have abd pain do not give antispas drug analgestic he could have appendicitis and will burst afterwards and might die or he might have abd cyst or GI tract problem causing the pain might have gallbladder stone or Urinary tract stone then to treat what ... always look after what is the cause and treat it.
Now why the Gazians had to use tunnels across the Palestinian \ Egypt boarders thats because they want food, clothes fuel milk etc does this a solution no it is not as they will continoe using tunnels what prevents the GAZian from having the minimum needs to survive it is the Seige blockade finishing the seige does it finish the problem of course no as there is no free movement no identity no state no freedom no independence then the real cause is the IDF OCCUPATION TO THE PALESTINIAN LAND thats the core and the real problem which should be solved... when it is solved the problem will be solved as in the case of appendicitis the coliky abd pain will continue till the appendix burst and the person will be in critical condition .. so the continuity of the OCCUPATIoN the continuity of stealing land must be ended as the appendectomy procedure by surgery to finish the abdominal suffering before it becomes chronic and burst...By ending the occupation then peace and safety will exist and no more tunnels or clashes ....
War , killing , destruction of buildings or olive oil trees the symble of peace will never be a solution and bring peace killing babies children women in the thought that the aged will die naturally and then there will be a land without people is complicating the situation and is a wrong thought as Palestinians will never finish till the end of life on the earth??!!
War must be turned off and changed to peace which true key is love not hate and not killing and not stealing land and not by building settlements while palestinians are not allowed to build a house or a shelter to live in ?
Love and be loved give peace you will have peace take off the hate from your heart will have love instead.
so the solution is ending the occupation and Palestine is known internationally as occupied territory the only country occupied in the whole world .. so put solution to ending the occupation is the real solution one stat two state whatever it willbe depends on what the end result will be of the peace talks true talks not just spending time ....Before the NAKBA 1948 both Jews and Palestinia-ns and muslims and christians lived together were neibours in one state and love each other till BElfoure promise , it is time to finish the occupation and it is time to stop hate and it is time to stop killing and it is time to be humans Insani persons not criminals.... It is time to stop mascara every few monthes and it is time to stop paying the bill of HOLLOCOUST by having new Hollocoust the Palestinians a-re not guilty for the HOLLOCOUST to pay the bill- ... it is time for stooping the cont. blindly support to the IDF by USA UK EU canada and the USA followers . it is time for UK to regret and correct the historical mistake of Belfoure promise .
Thats the solution Margret and Rose freedom independence and ending the occupation how thats by the politicians negotiations and what they will come out of .
Personally as it is known here to many and who doesnot know must know I am not politician will not be and never been or will be belonging to any political group , I am a palestinian refugee living in GAZA periodically till return to my parents grandparents homeland by one state solution two state solution does not matter as far as love is in the center of my heart and no hate.
sorry for long post but clarification was needed

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 4:18 am
I have been wondering and actually wanting to ask our friend Abo for quite some time why he always uses the term "IDF" when speaking of Israel in general...
Abo, is that simply some error on your part or is it you are suggesting that Israel's policy is actually identical/ driven by their army IDF (=Israel defense forces) ? In the latter case you would NOT be entirely wrong..

On the other hand, I realise (and support) the usual Palestinian term IOF (...occupation forces) instead of IDF.
Dear Abo, perhaps you could explain to me?

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 4:27 am
I share Evelyns views above and that's why I find it helpful to read that article i linked earlier about the plan the BWF came up with. (, Ynet Op-Ed >,7340,L-4568364,00.html) Creating a strong axis for peace.

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 4:30 am
Asking again: anyone else seeing those sex articles "we recommend"(Care2) above this post? WTF...

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 6:31 am
Ros, thx, that's ineresting you're NOT seeing them. It was my error to claim "recommended by C2", the ads are actually by Outbrain , only the bold font saying "We recommend" is misleading to think it's C2.

They are placed directly between the post(below the share buttons) and the comments section.
We saw these before, but then they disappeared and with this post was the first time after many months that i saw them again.

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 6:34 am
Somehow the headline Sam chose for the post even fits those ads...(given who is funding them^^ )

Past Member (0)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 7:34 am
Angelika R. - yes, those images have been there as long as I have been on Care2, I assumed everyone saw them and have been trying to ignore. But if you don't usually see them and now do, I guess there is something in our settings that needs to be changed/switched on/off. They really bug me.

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 7:49 am
Lorna, thx-wish I knew how/where to change that. I have AdblockPlus but that does not take this one away as it is sort of embedded with the posts, not outside the C2 contents like other ads.
The fact that I am just now seeing them again probably has to do with my use of a different, brand new laptop since yesterday, new installations incl.FF browser may have caused that, no clue. Have not yet checked if it also happens with Chrome or IE. That stuff needs to be banned by C2!

Marc P (50)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 12:58 pm
Angelika R.: Install the addon "Element Hiding Helper For Adblock Plus.: Then click on the Adblock Plus icon and select "Select an element to hide." Move the cursor on your computer to the offending ad and a red lined box should appear around the ad. If the box is too small hit the "W" key on your keyboard until the entire ad is enclosed in the red box. Then click inside the red box and the ad should disappear. Note that if you make the box too big and larger than the ad other things may disappear also. Let us know if this solves your problem. I hate those ads!

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 3:20 pm
thx Mark, will try that(if i understand it all what you say) btw, I meantime checked other browsers, IE doesn't even load this page and Chrome has 4 such pics and ads where there are 2 here.

Angelika R (143)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 3:40 pm
did it solve that problem for you Mark? I just installed that helper and followed your instructions(thx again, well done!) and it is now GONE, both, incl. the tiny logo for Outbrain! Hooray!
Was identified as class: ob_strip_container AP_3

Abo r (107)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 6:22 pm
1- thanks for stating the following statement and considering the IDF the occupying force (((it is about getting the Occupied forces (IDF) out...))) and the solution is No for occupation and this is achived by both one state finishes the occupation and palestine will be for all and 2 states too finishes the occupation and each will have a state, now agreed the occupation is the real problem.
2- You mentioned in the same comment(( and all the while Gaza and the West bank gets destroyed by Israel ))
ypu dear forget Jerusalem which is occupied too on 1967 which is destroyed by the IDF the occupying force.

Abo r (107)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 6:48 pm
Dear Angelika R, thanks for asking for clarification , it is not an error in saying IDF it exactly what you stated means IDF (=Israel defense forces) ,,, and it is as you stated also it is the occupying force .yes my freind . the IDF is the occupying force

Stephen B (23)
Wednesday September 10, 2014, 8:31 pm
Hi Ross :)

We have a giant crucifix sitting above the Speaker's chair in my provincial parliament. A law was proposed which would have effectively banned religious members of most non-Christian minorities from holding public-sector jobs or, arguably, holding office. It was popular until the government which proposed it was voted out of office for other reasons. There is also religious discrimination here regarding funding in the school-system. (The government funds teachers for government-required courses while communities provide funding for additional courses and programs. If the additional courses do not include non-Christian studies, the government also handles building-related costs.) The legal head of the Commonwealth, the British monarch, is the titular head of the Anglican Church. These still do not cause me to question Canada's status as a multi-ethnic democracy. I am concerned about some other things, like the revival of a law that technically forbids anybody from saying anything in public which might offend anybody else, true or not, or hosting such messages on a website. (Selective application of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act can mean arbitrary censorship run by part of the judiciary.) Israel does not face these problems.

I don't mean to say that Israel is more democratic than Canada, nor the other way around. Each nation has problems incomparable to those of other nations. One can always find ways in which one is comparing apples to oranges when producing a standard by which to judge the behaviour of nations and governments. However, on the whole, there is a massive division between post-imperial, non-imperial, and post-Caliphate regions. For human rights-records, I tend to look at whether the strategy of achieving internal peace is through tolerance or intolerance (either of which can be effective when applied properly), or if there is no such strategy ingrained in the culture.

Angelika R (143)
Thursday September 11, 2014, 10:55 am
Dear Abo, my thanks as well for responding to me. Of course IDF= IOF, that is what the suppressed and occupied Palestinians usually call them.
What i actually meant is this: I've noticed that very often, if not always, you use the term IDF when generally speaking of Israel government. And that is why i asked is this INTENTIONAL, emphasizing that they are in fact basically a military government, and I said that you would not be too wrong with that after all.
You have full right to call the entire Israeli regime an occupying force, that is what they are.

Abo r (107)
Thursday September 11, 2014, 11:56 am

IDF or IOF is the same as far as it expresses that it is occupation (Palestine) , I call it so as I am a refugee living in Gaza since NAKBA1948 and stated so before in many threads and I am not a politician.and do not belong to any group and will never my homeland is occupied and suffering from the occupation as all the palestinians everywhere...which done by the IDF and caused by the occupation which is the real problem in the ME .
Palestine is the only country occupied in @! century .
USA leaders put their prasure and others on Sudan and it became 2 states although it is one country. double face play for business..

Stephen B (23)
Thursday September 11, 2014, 8:25 pm
Hi Abo :)

Thanks for your posts. They are interesting. I have a question: If the controls around the borders of Gaza were removed, and normal trade and travel were permitted, if Gaza were effectively treated as an independent country, how do you think the rulers in place today would respond? Would they be appeased, or fight for more? If Hamas had completely free reign in Gaza to do whatever it wanted, with full access to modern military power for its forces, how would it treat Palestinians under its control and what laws would it enforce? What kind of society would it build? If the stakes over which it fought with Fatah and other factions were those of a full country rather than a semi-self-governing territory, after 600 Palestinians died in a fight over those lesser stakes, would the factions make peace or would the new state face civil war? I know the IDF inflicts terrible damage on the land, the infrastructure, and most importantly the people, but would life in Gaza really get that much better without it, or would other forces just take its place and do something similar?

Are there other elements of occupation left, aside from the border-controls, after 2005? I would really value your insight and input on this matter.

Angelika R (143)
Friday September 12, 2014, 6:13 am
correct Ros! and in many news reports as well, not just videos ^^

Angelika R (143)
Friday September 12, 2014, 6:22 am
"Are there other elements of occupation left, aside from the border-controls, after 2005? "
Stephen, I too will leave the answer up for Abo..but my personal remark on your question here would be that it more appropriately should read "are there other elements of freedom and a decent life, respecting humanity, left besides allowing ketchup and coriander in, although the IDF(and some 8000 settlers) was pulled out in 2005 "?

Angelika R (143)
Friday September 12, 2014, 6:29 am
I do acknowledge your point Stephen, about internal fights but, this is hypothetical as nobody is considering a rein over Gaza only by Hamas and afiliate groups, that is completely scrapped and Abbas has a reason for wanting the PA alone to have the say over ALL occupied territories. We have to wait and see how the current fight for this plays out. Meshaal will most likely not give up easily, especially as long as Abbas withholds the wages, so perhaps be prepared for more internal "war" over who holds the power.

Sheryl G (359)
Friday September 12, 2014, 9:10 am
Thanks Sam for the post. I just had an opportunity to read it although had noted earlier; and I read it, slowly and carefully. A very clearly laid out informational piece, step by step. As someone else previously mentioned, one to hang onto.

I like how she ended it: "There is no way around this truth: the road to Israel's security runs through Arab hearts, and the road to Palestinian liberation runs through Jewish hearts." Sara El-Yafi

Eleonora O (37)
Friday September 12, 2014, 4:10 pm

What an excellent rebuttal by this young lady – chapeau! Just a few points as promised …

#1) For completeness I’d like to add to her line “Israel eventually gained its official legitimacy when it was admitted to the UN as a member state in 1949 …” that the Preamble of this resolution of admission included a safeguarding clause as follows:
“Recalling its resolution of 29 November 1947 (on partition) and 11 December 1948 (on reparation and compensation), and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the ad hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions, the General Assembly ... decides to admit Israel into membership in the United Nations.” Up until today Israel has failed to fulfill its agreed to commitments …

"Before the end of the mandate and, therefore before any possible intervention by Arab states, the Jews, taking advantage of their superior military preparation and organization, had occupied...most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. ... In contrast, the Palestine Arabs did not seize any of the territories reserved for the Jewish state under the partition resolution." British author, Henry Cattan, "Palestine, The Arabs and Israel."

#3) The following might be of interest which gets very little to no mention in political discourses. This is NOT to start arguing a case; it is just to show how one-sided the story is since the onset of the official State of Israel and – more important – since before. The Zionists violated the Balfour Agreement - they violated Res. 181 the moment it was issued by implementing "Plan Dalet" - they stole more than 20% of land which was allotted to the Palestinians BEFORE the declaration of the State - they continue to do so up until today with impunity. This is against all the laws, resolutions and agreements - many of which Israel is signatory to.

I refer again to “The History of the Palmach” which details the efforts made to attack the Palestinian Arabs and secure even more territory. With respect to "Plan Dalet" we read:

"… control the area given to us [the Zionists] by the U.N. in addition to areas occupied by Arabs which were outside these borders and the setting up of forces to counter the possible invasion of Arab armies after May 15" (Qurvot 1948, p. 16, which covers the operations of Haganah and Palmach, see Ha Sepher Ha Palmach, The Book of Palmach).

1. Operation Nachson, 1 April 1948
2. Operation Harel, 15 April 1948
3. Operation Misparayim, 21 April 1948
4. Operation Chametz, 27 April 1948
5. Operation Jevuss, 27 April 1948
6. Operation Yiftach, 28 April 1948
7. Operation Matateh, 3 May 1948
8. Operation Maccabi, 7 May 1948
9. Operation Gideon, 11 May 1948
10. Operation Barak, 12 May 1948
11. Operation Ben Ami, 14 May 1948
12. Operation Pitchfork, 14 May 1948
13. Operation Schfifon, 14 May 1948

The operations 1-8 indicate operations carried out before the entry of the Arab forces inside the areas allotted by the UN to the Arab state. It has to be noted that of thirteen specific full-scale operations under Plan Dalet eight were carried out outside the area "given" by the UN to the Zionists.

The following is an incomplete list of the major military operations the Zionists mounted before the British evacuated Palestine and before the Arab forces entered Palestine:

- Qazaza (21 Dec. 1947)
- Sa'sa (16 Feb. 1948)
- Haifa (21 Feb. 1948)
- Salameh (1 March 1948)
- Biyar Adas (6 March 1948)
- Qana (13 March 1948)
- Qastal (4 April 1948)
- Deir Yassin (9 April 1948)
- Lajjun (15 April 1948)
- Saris (17 April 1948)
- Tiberias (20 April 1948)
- Haifa (22 April 1948)
- Jerusalem (25 April 1948)
- Jaffa (26 April 1948)
- Acre (27 April 1948)
- Jerusalem (1 May 1948)
- Safad (7 May 1948)
- Beisan (9 May 1948).

Further we read in Benny Morris’ "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949” that on 10 April, Haganah units took Abu Shusha ... The village was destroyed that night ... Khulda was leveled by Jewish bulldozers on 20 April ... Abu Zureiq was completely demolished Al Mansi and An Naghnaghiya, to the southeast, were also leveled. . .By mid-1949, the majority of … depopulated Arab villages were either completely or partly in ruins and uninhabitable."

"That Ben-Gurion's ultimate aim was to evacuate as much of the Arab population as possible from the Jewish state can hardly be doubted, if only from the variety of means he employed to achieve his purpose...most decisively, the destruction of whole villages and the eviction of their inhabitants...even [if] they had not participated in the war and had stayed in Israel hoping to live in peace and equality, as promised in the Declaration of Independence." Israeli author, Simha Flapan, "The Birth of Israel."

“The Israelis now allege that the Palestine war began with the entry of the Arab armies into Palestine after 15 May 1948. But that was the second phase of the war; they overlook the massacres, expulsions and dispossessions which took place prior to that date and which necessitated Arab states' intervention." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest."

“Fighting continued, almost all of it WITHIN [Emphasis added] the territory assigned to the Palestinian state...About 700,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled in the 1948 conflict." Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."

We should also not forget that Jordan's King Abdullah promised [the Israelis and the British] that his troops, the Arab Legion, the only real fighting force among the Arab armies, would avoid fighting with Jewish settlements...Yet Western historians record this as the moment when the young state of Israel fought off "the overwhelming hordes' of five Arab countries. In reality, the Israeli offensive against the Palestinians intensified.

I agree with Dandelion: a great ending to a great article!

Eleonora O (37)
Friday September 12, 2014, 4:15 pm

I hope that Abo will find the time to answer Stephen's questions - it definitely will be interesting to read what he has to say!

Stephen, as for your question: "I know the IDF inflicts terrible damage on the land, the infrastructure, and most importantly the people, but would life in Gaza really get that much better without it, ..." I suggest you get a ticket, border a plane and go to Gaza. You would have to go through the Rafah crossing but that way you can make a stop in Egypt ;-). See for yourself how "life" is in Gaza ...

Sheryl G (359)
Friday September 12, 2014, 4:42 pm
There is only one place that I would like to address that Abo mentions:

"occupation and Palestine is known internationally as occupied territory the only country occupied in the whole world"

The American Indian would say that this forgets about them. Reservations are a "whitewash" name for Prisoner of War Camps. Pine Ridge Reservation is POW Camp #344 for instance. The First Nations in Canada as the American Indian have been resisting for hundreds of years now.

Despite treaties that were negotiated every step of the way, NOT ONE has been honored by the US Federal Government. Our lands are still being stolen, our resources stolen, if payment is accepted by forced hand it is never paid fully if at all. Our children are still being ripped from our homes, the slow genocide continues. Most in the USA ignore this fact, or do not even realize it. History is for the victorious and even when defeated in a battle, the Dominant Culture ignored the treaty and write the books to tell what they want.

This thread isn't about us, so I'll not say much more, but is why those of us with Native heritage more than understand what is going on, even if we don't have the full story of what is going on over in the Middle East. We understand oppression, we understand disrespect, we understand being called negative names so it's easier to kill Indians, we understand having the narrative changed to suit the oppressors desires, we know about a two tier system, we understand what it was and still is to be denied food, health care, and have entire villages leveled. Our ceremonies and our spiritual ways were forbidden by law by the Federal Government, met with jail sentences and heavy fines if caught, until the mid 1970's. Even today, we are still denied all our ways to honor our Creator, having to constantly go back to court. When we speak out to loudly, we go to jail, are disappeared, found dead, or the women are raped and beaten, to send a message.

Indians understand what it is like to have the weight of the entire USA Government brought down upon them. At Wounded Knee 2 in 1973 American Indians had rifles and courage they had their ancestors there who had died in Wounded Knee 1. The Federal Government met those rifles with helicopters, jets, tanks, mortars and machine guns.
Wounded Knee 2

Mt Rushmore where the heads of the White Men are carved into stone, is the most Sacred of land for many of the American Indian Nations, that was STOLEN. This is where many ceremonies were and still are secretly done. But right there is where the USA Government chose to place the Presidents heads that stole the lands. A symbol of arrogance. Yes, we understand and still resist.

Angelika R (143)
Friday September 12, 2014, 5:14 pm
Sheryl I am quite glad and thankful you mention this! it is the very reason why I earlier posted on Sam's thread with the excellent and powerful Dr Masri video/speech that I kind of missed her mentioning this, or including it in her term "connecting the struggle" where she did mention Afican Americans, not Indian Americans,though.
This isn't a complaint, I only wanted to make clear what I meant and you demonstrated this perfectly just now.
Thanks, hope Sam won't mind..

Angelika R (143)
Friday September 12, 2014, 5:17 pm
From that history, it is fair enough to call all these regimes cleptomaniacs and psychopaths, to avoid the word terrorists and criminals, which they are in truth!

Stephen B (23)
Friday September 12, 2014, 7:07 pm
Hi Eleonora :)

I would very much like to see first-hand how life in Gaza is, but I get the impression that a short visit really wouldn't do it. I would have to live there for some time, including through an IDF incursion. If it's really as dangerous as people say, I think I'll stick to listening to Palestinian friends from Gaza and the West Bank,and what information I can get from a distance.

Hi Angelika and Abo :)

Technically, Bosnia has been under foreign rule since the war there. Arguably, Scotland still is too. If you want to really look at nations living under the rule of governments run by very different nations, a large chunk of Africa would fit the bill, perhaps most notably in Mali where the people who once formed the Fulani Empire (aka Sokoto Caliphate) live under mostly Songhai rule. There are many other cases of that too. Some good parallels to the Palestinian situation regarding foreign rule, would include East Timor and South Sudan prior to their respective achievements of independence. I could probably dig up a few more if you want.

Eleonora O (37)
Friday September 12, 2014, 11:15 pm

Hi Stephen,

I didn't limit your stay in Gaza - it will not be long before there's another "war" - just wait and see (I hope very much that I'm proven wrong!!).

It seems to me that you'd also need to visit South Sudan or have you truly not heard that the Christians kill the Christians ... it's just not figuring prominently in the news because they fight over the very same thing as previously with the Muslims. But as there are no Muslims involved it's of nobody's interest ... not even my "good friends" from the e-brigade - LOL!!

As for the fact of being "technically occupied" - there's one relatively good example: Germany. As of today there's still no peace treaty signed with the USA so "technically speaking" Germany is still occupied. Or has anything changed, Angelika?

Angelika R (143)
Saturday September 13, 2014, 5:18 pm
lol Eleonora-and right you are! Not that I would know of, we're still "at war" with the US, the Brits and the French (and we still can feel it to some degree) Only no more with the Russians as there's no more UDSSR.
Only surrender documents were signed to this day.

Angelika R (143)
Saturday September 13, 2014, 5:24 pm
And the "occupation" theoretically actually lasted until the allied troups pulled out of Berlin in 1994

Stephen B (23)
Saturday September 13, 2014, 11:43 pm
Hi Eleonora :)

I definitely heard that Christians kill Christians, in South Sudan and elsewhere. The sad part is that even the fighting between South Sudan and (I guess now North) Sudan was barely a blip in the news here. Nobody here really cares about it either way.

I hope there won't be more fighting so fat in Gaza too, but after seeing what PIJ is up to, sadly, I don't expect it will be long either..It will probably follow the usual pattern of some minor faction attacking Israel form Gaza, Israel retaliating, Hamas insisting that any strike in Gaza is a violation of the ceasefire and escalating, followed by another round like the one that just passed. I understand (from an al-Jazeera clip I saw) that the digging of new tunnels by PIJ, complete with fortified artillery-positions,, began within minutes of the latest ceasefire going into effect. Honestly, I think with the settlements having been pulled out of the Strip, Palestinians will be unable to keep Gaza in the long-term. It will just be too violent.

Hi Angelika :)

I'd understood that the NATO forces in Germany remained upon invitation (r at least non-kicking-out) from the German government, especially after the High Commissioners' position ended in 1990.

Eleonora O (37)
Monday September 15, 2014, 5:47 am

Stephen - you're a darling and I have permission from my hubby to say so ;-)!

"It will probably follow the usual pattern of some minor faction attacking Israel form Gaza, Israel retaliating, ..."

It never enters your mind that it could be the other way around as it was proven beyond any doubts in the past on so many occasions? If you defend all your friends the way you defend Israel - then it must be nice to have you as a friend in real life. Don't look for sarcasm as there is none - I mean it.

As for "Palestinians will be unable to keep Gaza in the long-term." that was the idea all along - nothing new here; just delayed by some years as the time wasn't right. I thought we all knew that (?). The Gaza pull-out was just another charade; kind of smoke screen to get the ultimate at a later stage.

As for Gaza (or the West Bank) being "just be too violent", Stephen: treat the root cause of the problem and stop applying Aspirin and then we'll see peace. Not before. Without justice nothing holds for a long time.

We can dance around the issue ... or cover it with fictitious problems and all kind of speculations ... it just doesn't go away.

As for Sudan:
If the fighting between what is today South Sudan and Sudan was barely "a blip in the news" where you live ... I would change location ;-). It definitely was not a blip in the Israeli news. I followed this "conflict" closely ever since the first Nuba Agreement was drafted by Switzerland mid 90's and the US saw it "fit" to throw it out as it was not what they wanted.

It was continuously colored as a religious conflict ... but once the South got his fair share in the oil revenue they threw out their Bible and the North did the same with the Qur'an. But the aim by others was not that they live in relative harmony again together - the aim was to separate them. So after a few years the South was "highly motivated" to start fighting all over again and so was the North. Ultimately and this time resulting in the secession - this was in the making since early 1980 as we know from the Yinon Plan.

An interesting detail is that once South Sudan was "independent" ... that little and only democracy got an oil deal signed; if memory serves me right it was in January 2013. Funny how "nature" plays at times, don't you think?

Plenty of dirty deals around and nobody questions the fact that the dots as presented don't connect ... or only with a tremendous effort in twist 'n turn.

Sad state of the world, isn't it?


Stephen B (23)
Saturday September 20, 2014, 5:17 pm
Hi Eleonora :)

Sorry I didn't respond for a while. I got really busy last week.

What was proven several times was that Israel struck at Gaza before Hamas struck at Israel. There was generally no accounting for other factions in any of those proofs. It's how a lot of investigations get rigged, whether done through the U.N. in the Middle East or by universities refusing to admit malfeasance by their faculty. They limit the scope of investigation to exclude any evidence which would support the claims they oppose.

The pull-out wasn't a charade. I think it was a mistake. There are two major problems which are generally ignored even by Israelis: First, they are the only ethnically Israeli communities in the Palestinian territories. Second, they are the only substantial ethnic minority living there (though there are religious minorities). These both tell me, at least, that as asinine as some settlers are, and as outright dangerous as a few communities of them can be, on the whole, odd as it may seem, it is necessary for a two-state solution that they remain in place, eventually as part of a Palestinian country.

The first issue is one of asymmetric irridentism. There would be Palestinian communities along Israel's borer and not Israeli ones within a Palestinian state,without the settlers. Normally, the presence of a community ethnically tied to a country, on the border, which wants to join that country, is cause for a land-claim. Such claims are normally stopped before they can escalate to war by counter-claims by the other country, demanding some region where people ethnically tied to it are located within the first country. However, when the presence is asymmetric, that can't be done, and the claim escalates into a territorial conflict.

This has contributed to war many,many times over. Asymmetric irridentism is commonly considered a major driving force in the Indian-Pakistani conflict, where there are Muslim-majority communities in a border-region within India, but no Hindu-majority communities on the Pakistani side of the border, and in WWI when there were Germans dominant in a French border-region and not vice-versa. It showed up in Georgia with Russians living there, and recently in Crimea. It probably didn't really drive any of those conflicts alone very much,but it gives effective political cover for pro-war factions, which there would be even after a two-state solution is established, especially one with a border determined by demographics. Without the tools to diplomatically de-escalate, short of full-blown ethnic cleansing or expulsion, which would be horrible on many levels, a two-state solution would just lead to another war, and I get the impression (even just glancing at the relative military power) that such a war would end with the new Palestinian state completely re-occupied. That would defeat the purpose. Unfortunately, with the settlers out of Gaza,unless factions there would care about land-swaps with the West Bank, there would be no such tool.

The other problem is that ethnic minorities are an essential part of a country Without the variety in the ideas in civic discourse made possible by the inclusion of minorities or foreign cultures, social progress slows to a crawl. This is why we see 20th-century Islamic Crusaders under al-Qaeda and would-be theocrats in northern Iraq now. Perhaps more immediately and obviously relevant, do we want to see a new country born after the elimination of all minorities, or after peace is established between the dominant group and them? I know some settlers have been a lot more than asinine and would likely be impossible partners for peace, but getting the rest, the majority of them who just moved to the settlements to live a suburban life, to police them, would be enough too. I want Palestinians to have a country, but I also care a lot about what kind of country it would be. Would they live in a free society where political dissenters and minorities are protected, or an oppressive tyranny? The litmus test for that, the possibility of peace between the majority and minorities, can no longer be used in the Gaza Strip. That's scary, and removes a simple route towards getting Israel to trust Palestinians with a full legal country, and things like the corresponding rights to purchase modern military hardware to do with as they wish.

Part of the problem with this "dancing around" and "Avoiding the root cause" is that we genuinely disagree on what the root cause is. You seem to think it's Israeli control over Gaza and the West Bank. I think it goes much, much deeper than that and pro-war factions on both sides would only be emboldened by creating a full legal border to invade across.

It is a sad state of the world with the dots as presented really not connecting. I don't think it takes twists and turns, though, or even replacing the overall picture. There are just a lot of dots in between that would not go over well for the free press' profits or government-propaganda. I try to follow the news from Montreal. My usual sources these days are quite limited, though: I use CNN, BBC, National Post, Montreal Gazette, Channelnewsasia, a forum full of analysts who tend to catch major events about a month before they happen (that I call the "anti-Care2" here), Care2 itself, and a few topic-specific blogs. The Middle East is not my main focus, news-wise, today, but when it is I also use al-Arabiya, al JAzeera, and Ynet / JPost (which often cover the same stories).

I totally would help you as unceasingly as I do with other friends. I wish I had the meas right now with your work.

Have a nice day! :)
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in World

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.