Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the Freedom Party (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.
The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of American support for his party in the coming Israeli elections, and to cement political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United States. Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.
Before irreparable damage is done by way of financial contributions, public manifestations in Begin's behalf, and the creation in Palestine of the impression that a large segment of America supports Fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objectives of Mr. Begin and his movement.
The public avowals of Begin's party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.
Attack on Arab Village
A shocking example was their behavior in the Arab village of Deir Yassin. This village, off the main roads and surrounded by Jewish lands, had taken no part in the war, and had even fought off Arab bands who wanted to use the village as their base. On April 9 (THE NEW YORK TIMES), terrorist bands attacked this peaceful village, which was not a military objective in the fighting, killed most of its inhabitants, 240 men, women, and children, and kept a few of them alive to parade as captives through the streets of Jerusalem. Most of the Jewish community was horrified at the deed, and the Jewish Agency sent a telegram of apology to King Abdullah of Trans-Jordan. But the terrorists, far from being ashamed of their act, were proud of this massacre, publicized it widely, and invited all the foreign correspondents present in the country to view the heaped corpses and the general havoc at Deir Yassin.
The Deir Yassin incident exemplifies the character and actions of the Freedom Party.
Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority. Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions. In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model.
During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.
The people of the Freedom Party have had no part in the constructive achievements in Palestine. They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity. Their much-publicized immigration endeavors were minute, and devoted mainly to bringing in Fascist compatriots.
The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party. This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a Leader State is the goal.
In the light of the foregoing considerations, it is imperative that the truth about Mr. Begin and his movement be made known in this country. It is all the more tragic that the top leadership of American Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin's efforts, or even to expose to its own constituents the dangers to Israel from support to Begin.
The undersigned therefore take this means of publicly presenting a few salient facts concerning Begin and his party; and of urging all concerned not to support this latest manifestation of fascism.
ISIDORE ABRAMOWITZ, HANNAH ARENDT, ABRAHAM BRICK, RABBI JESSURUN CARDOZO, ALBERT EINSTEIN, HERMAN EISEN, M.D., HAYIM FINEMAN, M. GALLEN, M.D., H.H. HARRIS, ZELIG S. HARRIS, SIDNEY HOOK, FRED KARUSH, BRURIA KAUFMAN, IRMA L. LINDHEIM, NACHMAN MAISEL, SYMOUR MELMAN, MYER D. MENDELSON, M.D., HARRY M. ORLINSKY, SAMUEL PITLICK, FRITZ ROHRLICH, LOUIS P. ROCKER, RUTH SAGER, ITZHAK SANKOWSKY, I.J. SCHOENBERG, SAMUEL SHUMAN, M. ZNGER, IRMA WOLPE, STEFAN WOLPE
New York, Dec. 2, 1948
I would like to make a couple of points here. The digression in the thread as to whether the author is being unnecessarily inflammatory does not address the main issue, which is that crucial to the current policies of Israel is the presumption that Palestinians deserve to live as a stateless people. They dont. They didnt deserve their ethnic cleasing, they dont deserve the daily tortures and humiliations of living as a stateless people, and there wont be peace until Israel acknowledges Palestine's right to exist.
Second, not all Zionists were terrorists, murders and right-wing religious extremists like Begin and Shamir. Most Jewish emigres to Palestine did not condon these tactics, and many were enlighted liberals who understood that the new Jewish community must live in peace with the local people. But the historical fact is that it is the right-wing terrorists who took control of the state of Israel and their direct political heir, Netanyahu is intent on carrying out their policies.
The whole population density side conversation is really irrelevant to the key issue. The problem is not the population density of Palestinian territory, but rather that the population is living in prison camps, denied citizenship in any country, unable to travel (no one can issue passports) or engage in commerce, dependent on international aid for survival.
Israel's plan is not to arrive at a formal disposition for the Palestinians, but to delay any disposition, and make vague promises while systematically undermining Palestinian sovereignty.
The first Bush got very publicly frustrated with Shamir, I remember, and Shamir admitted after his term as prime minister ended that he was playing lip service to American demands while massively increasing West Bank colonization.
Clinton at least had Rabin to work with for part of the time, and there was a glimmering hope for peace then.
The last Bush was everything right wing Israelis wanted in a US president, who played lip service to a two state solution, but was placated by every superficial promise made, and let Israel manifest the worst of its aggression with tacit approval.
Obama's stance here does not strike me as courageous, just logical. I am hoping that the end result will be that the US stops obstructing international diplomacy, which can prod Israel to accept that it will need to begin working on a actual plan for disposition, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon. When it comes, however, it can be powerful. When the US finally decided to stop protecting South African apartheid, Mandela was president in a few short years.
And for the record, Netanyahu is just as a much of a rabid extremist as Lieberman. I remember seeing a CNN interview with him after Rabin's assassination and he explained to Wolf Blitzer in very clear terms how a Palestinian state was incompatible with an Israeli state, and he would never accept it.
Notice how the entire Jordan River Valley has been ethnically cleansed, preventing the West Bank from having borders with any country other than Israel.
The long term plan here is pretty obvious, taking as much of the West Bank as possible, and forcing the Palestinians into "indian reserves/South African-type homelands" where they would be denied their own government, and denied citizenship in Israel. Like now.
Well, first there are the Samaritans (descendants of the Kingdom of Israel, as opposed to most modern Jews who are descendants of the Kingdom of Judea, and the Babylonian exile.) There is a question about whether these too groups recognize each other as Jewish, but both clearly claim the religion as their own. A current population of around 400 Samaritans live as Palestinian Jews under occupation.
Then there are the Jewish Palestinians, most of who are recognized as full citizens of Israel, but clearly identify themselves as Palestinians. Before partition 11% of Palestinians were Jewish, and many live under occupation, especially in Jerusalem. There are several notable anti-zionist Palestinian Jews.
Uri Davis, an Israeli citizen, academic, activist and observer-member in the Palestine National Council living in the Arab town of Sakhnin, identifies himself as an "anti-Zionist Palestinian Jew".
Davis's use of the term is best exemplified by his explanation that: "I don't describe myself as a Palestinian Jew, I actually happen to be a Palestinian Jew, I was born in Jerusalem in 1943 in a country called Palestine and the title of my birth certificate is `Government of Palestine'. That is neither here nor there, though. It is significant only in a political context in which I am situated, and the political context that is relevant to my work, my advocacy of a critique of Zionism. I'm an anti-Zionist Jew."
There are thousands of Palestinian Jews who live in peace with Palestinian Christians and Muslims under occupation. Palestinians have never had a problem with Jews, but with the Jewish European colonists who took for themselves the right to ethnically cleanse an Arab land to found an apartheid state.
The question I always ask the Israeli apologists is what do you do with the Palestinians? Annex the territories, grant full equality and citizenship with the right to return to cities from which they were ethnically cleansed, the right to buy property and to participate fully in a democratic government?
Or do you suggest a withdrawal from lands occupied but not annexed, and allow the Palestinians to form an independent nation, which includes the right to control airspace, water aquifers, form alliances and raise a military?
For the typical Machivellian "the ends justifies the means" Israel apologist, neither choice is acceptable, which is why the strategies described in this post are right on point. As I explained earlier in the thread, just one US vote in the UN security council would begin to unravel the decades-long delaying tactics of Israel.
Obama only has to instruct the US delegation to the UN to stop vetoing security council resolutions. That way, it is not the US that forces Israel to a bargaining stance, but the rest of the world, including all NATO allies, who routinely vote against Israel when given a chance.
Israel's policy to make the Palestinian people permanently warehoused and stripped of rights is now, and has always hung on the tenuous thread of US support. One passed vote in the security council will lead to massive and sudden change, and allow hardcore international diplomacy to work.
By giving College Republicans recognition, and allowing them university resources and funds to organize and recruit, and refusing College Democrats the same status, Liberty University is endorsing a political party.
Liberty University has the right to do this. Churches have the right to do this as well. But by endorsing a political party, churches, as well as universities lose tax exempt status, and a university loses federal funds, including federal Pell grants for students, and subsidized student loans.
Any douchebags out there wanna tell me this is false logic?
I totally disagree. 180+ nations in the UN (including all NATO allies) agree in an annual plenary session that the governmental policies of Israel are apartheid (only Jews can buy land, et al,) and that a perpetual occupation of Palestine without disposition merits sanctions and diplomatic efforts to ensure rights for the indigenous people of Palestine.
The obvious truth is that Israel is only one security council vote away from becoming a rogue nation, diplomatically and economically isolated. When Israel loses the support of the US, it will be forced to undergo a change in its government as radical as South Africa did in the 1990's, allowing its dispossessed majority full equality.