The quotations by right-wing Zionists below leave no
doubt that their goal from the very beginning was to
"transfer" (ethnically cleanse) Palestinians and
"appropriate" (steal) their land.
While the stolen land may be "free" to Israeli robber barons, it has been very
costly to Palestinians, Americans and the world, as the Palestinian Nakba ("Catastrophe") led directly
to 9-11 and two disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
compiled by Michael R. Burch, an editor and publisher of
Holocaust and Nakba poetry
Moshe Sharett, Israel's second Prime Minister, explained why Israeli military
campaigns like Operation Cast Lead, Operation Pillar of Defense and Operation
Protective Edge are doomed
to fail, when he asked rhetorically: "Do people consider that when military reactions outstrip
in their severity the events that caused them, grave processes are set in motion
which widen the gulf and thrust our neighbors into the extremist camp? How can
this deterioration be halted?"
Sharett was wise enough to anticipate that
Israel's militant dogma of the "Iron Wall" would lead to militant resistant
groups like the PLO and Hamas.
The answer to Sharett's question is surprisingly simple: first stop stealing your neighbors' land,
if you want peace, since stealing their land is evil and requires a brutal military
occupation, which makes it a war crime. Another Israeli prime minister,
Ariel Sharon, admitted the
root problem: "You cannot like the word, but what is happening is an
hold 3.5 million Palestinians under occupation. I believe that is a terrible
thing for Israel and for the Palestinians."
So why doesn't Israel take the first step required for peace, and stop robbing
Palestinians of their ever-dwindling land? Probably because
the transfer of Palestinian land into Jewish hands is a core belief of
Israel's national ideology, Zionism. On this page, you will find hundreds of quotations
which confirm that racist expansionism by stealing
land has been a goal of political Zionism for
more than a century. Early Zionist leaders like Theodr Herzl, Ze'ev Jabotinsky
and David Ben-Gurion were very clear about their intention to ethnically cleanse Palestinians
and acquire their land (a process that still continues in the West Bank today
via the euphemistic "settlement expansion" that has resulted in the
destruction of more than 20,000 Palestinian homes and millions of valuable olive
are examples provided by
Jewish historians, major newspapers, and other reputable sources.
Please keep in mind that when the terms "transfer," "eviction" and "removal" are used, the Zionists
talking about compulsory population transfer, or ethnic cleansing, a crime against peace
When the term "expropriation" is used, it means the theft
of Palestinian land via superior firepower, which is armed robbery and
When the right of return is denied to Palestinians, this dooms the victims of
ethnic cleansing to remain stateless, rightless refugees forever.
Honest Jews have admitted the horror of what Israeli Jews did—not only to
to Palestinians who were not evicted:
"Do we sin only against the refugees? Do we not treat the Arabs who remain as
second-class citizens? Did a single Jewish farmer raise his hand in the
Parliament in opposition to a law that deprived Arab peasants of their land? ...
How lonely, in the city of Jerusalem, sits the Jewish conscience."—Moshe Smilansky in
his essay "Zion and the Jewish National Idea" published
in the Menorah Journal, Volume XVI, 1958
We can find the genesis of the
problem in an 1895 diary entry of Theodr Herzl, the founder of modern
Zionism. Herzl was clearly writing a recipe for the ethnic cleansing of
long before the Holocaust or any major acts of Arab violence against Jews in
"[We Zionists will] spirit the penniless population across the border [of the Jewish
state] by denying it employment ...
Both the process of expropriation [theft of land] and the
removal [ethnic cleansing] of the poor must be carried
out discreetly and circumspectly."—Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist
Organization, speaking of the racist expulsion of Palestinian Arabs, in his diary on June 12, 1895
Obviously, there is no need to be discrete and circumspect when people are doing
good or acceptable things. Here are other Zionist leaders who clearly advocated ethnic
cleansing, without bothering to be discrete or circumspect. In fact, in one of
its first acts as a nation in 1948, Israel created a
Transfer Committee to supervise the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians!
The director of the Transfer Committee was Yossef
(Joseph) Weitz, who also kept a diary, so we know exactly what he was thinking
and doing, in his own words. And they are chilling:
"It is our right to
Palestinians!"—Transfer Committee director Yossef (Joseph) Weitz
"We must work out a secret plan based on the
removal of the Arabs ... [and] include it
in American political circles."—Weitz
"There is no other way than to
TRANSFER the Arabs from here to neighboring
countries, all of them."—Weitz
"Not one village, not one [Arab] tribe should be left."—Weitz
"If the Arabs leave, the country will become wide and spacious for us [Jews]."—Weitz
"Only after this
TRANSFER will the country be able to absorb millions of our
TRANSFER of Arabs from the Jewish state [serves two aims]: to
diminish the Arab population and release Arab land to Jews."—Weitz
Israel's system of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and brutal repression of
Palestinians begins with the "Iron Wall" dogma of Ze'ev Jabotinsky, as explained
by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who once said, “We all grew up as
faithful to the doctrine of Jabotinsky." Jabotinsky was the spiritual father of
the Likud, and he was a staunch advocate of "transfer" or ethnic
"The Islamic soul must be broomed [swept, ethnically cleansed] out of Eretz-Yisrael."—Ze'ev
Jabotinsky, spiritual father of the Likud
"Arabs must make room for
Jews. If it was possible to transfer the Baltic peoples, it is also possible to
TRANSFER the Palestinians."—Jabotinsky
"If we desire that Israel should become and remain a Jewish State, we must first
of all create a Jewish majority [by expelling Arabs.]"—Jabotinsky
The same mantra can be heard on the lips of other leading Zionists ...
"There is no Zionism, colonization, or Jewish state without the
EVICTION of the
Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."—Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon
interests of security demand that we get rid of them."—Prime Minister Moshe Sharett
"TRANSFER [ethnic cleansing] could be the crowning achievement,
the final stage in the development of [Zionist] policy."—Sharett
"We are equally
determined to explore all possibilities of getting rid, once and for all, of the
huge Arab minority."—Sharett
"[Land is acquired] by force—that is, by CONQUEST in
war, or in other words, by ROBBING land from its owner."—Menachem Ussishkin
"If there are other inhabitants there, they must
be TRANSFERRED to some other place."—Ussishkin
"Zionism is a TRANSFER of the Jews."—David Ben-Gurion, Israel's
first Prime Minister
TRANSFER of the Arabs, this is much easier than any other
TRANSFER of the Arabs ... could give us
something which we never had [even in Biblical times]."—Ben-Gurion
"Jewish power, which grows steadily, will also increase our possibilities to
carry out the
TRANSFER on a large scale."—Ben-Gurion
TRANSFER we will have a vast area
... I support compulsory transfer. I don't see anything
immoral in it."—Ben-Gurion
"It is impossible to imagine general
EVACUATION without compulsion, and brutal compulsion."—Ben-Gurion
"Let us not ignore the truth ... politically we are the aggressors and they
defend themselves ... The country is theirs because they inhabit it."—Ben-Gurion
"Before the founding of the state ... our main interest was self-defense ... But now the issue at hand is conquest,
"We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to
Trans-Jordan, and Syria."—Ben-Gurion
"We must do everything to ensure they [ethnically cleansed Palestinian
refugees] never return."—Ben-Gurion
"There are two issues here: sovereignty and the REMOVAL of a certain number of
Arabs, and we must insist
on both of them."—Ben-Gurion
"Ben-Gurion was prepared to accept the [partition] ... on two
conditions: [Jewish] sovereignty and compulsory
The last two statements are very important, because the two most important
things to the Zionists were racist ideas: Jewish rule
and ethnic cleansing of the Arabs to create an artificial Jewish majority.
David Ben-Gurion was Israel's
George Washington and its first Prime Minister. If we want to understand why the government of Israel ordered hundreds of Palestinian villages and
thousands of individual homes to be destroyed in 1948, leaving around 750,000
Palestinian farmers and their families homeless, destitute refugees, we need
look no further than the quotes above. The question is not why the Palestinians
fled. People often flee wars and natural disasters. The question is why their
houses were destroyed and they were not allowed to return when the fighting was
over and Israel's borders were secure. The answer is that the men in power had
long planned to "transfer" the Palestinians in order to "purify" the land for
the Jews they deemed to be "superior" to Arabs. Zionist leaders like
Menachem Begin were racists,
fascists and religious fanatics, as Albert Einstein and 27 other leading Jewish
intellectuals pointed out in their
open letter to the
New York Times in 1948.
Why is Israel constantly at odds with its neighbors? Is it because they
"hate" Jews? No, it's because they hate what Israeli Jews have done
to their Palestinian brothers and sisters, who have been victims of Israeli
racism, apartheid and ethnic cleansing since the Nakba ("Catastrophe")
began in 1948.
The racism of Israel's most prominent leaders is self-evident in the following
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian."—Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir
(later parroted by Newt
Gingrich and Rick Santorum)
"How can we return the held territories? There is
nobody to return them to."—Meir
"It is not as though there was a Palestinian people ... and we came and threw them
out and took their country away from them ... they did not exist."—Meir
"Anyone who speaks in favor of bringing the Arab refugees back ... It is better
that things are stated clearly and plainly: We shall not let this happen."—Meir
"The Palestinians are like crocodiles ..."—Prime Minister Ehud Barak
"We shall reduce the Palestinians to a community of woodcutters and waiters."—Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin
Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever."—Prime
Minister Menachem Begin
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."—Begin (see
"I believed and to this day still believe, in our people's eternal and historic
right to this entire land."—Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
"They [the Palestinians] are as grasshoppers in our sight."—Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir
"All of the land of Israel is ours."—Shamir
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs." Israeli Prime
Minister Menachem Begin said this during a speech to the Knesset, as cited by Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the
'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25,1982. There is some debate about whether
Begin was referring to all Palestinians, or only to Palestinian terrorists. But
it hardly matters, since Begin was the preeminent terrorist in the
Middle East, as pointed out in
Albert Einstein's 1948 Letter to the New York Times.
Only a racist would claim that it is wrong for people of other races or
ethnicities to do things he is justified to do himself.
The quotes above sound like Nazis talking about Jews, before and during the Holocaust.
And these are the prime ministers of Israel talking! Unfortunately American
politicians who claim to believe in equal rights and justice for all human
beings also ignore the right of millions of completely innocent
Palestinian women and children to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
also want to read and consider
Ministers who were Terrorists and
Does Israel Really Want Peace?
As Albert Einstein and other Jewish intellectuals pointed out in their
open letter to the
New York Times in 1948, the Zionist leaders
the methods of the Nazis and other European fascists. So it is no wonder that
Israel has never enjoyed real, lasting peace. And today the United States is
also unable to find real, lasting peace because American politicians refuse to
require Israel to act like a civilized nation. Instead, they provide Israel with
billions of dollars in "loans" (none of which have ever been repaid) and advanced
weapons, which Israel then uses to steal even more land and water from
Palestinian farmers and their families. How does this take place?
"We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."—Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as reported on
Kol Yisrael radio.
While this may be hard for freedom-loving, independent-minded
Americans to believe, as the saying goes, the "proof is in the pudding."
Recently, H.R. 4133 passed a deeply divided Congress by the stunning vote of 411
to 2. The bill gives Israel everything it needs to attack Iran, including
refueling tankers, special munitions (i.e., bunker-busting bombs) and unlimited
sums of money to finance the war and maintain
Israel's military supremacy in the Middle East. H.R. 4133 strongly
suggests that Sharon was
speaking the truth.
"There is a huge gap between us and our enemies not just in
ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and
conscience.—President Moshe Katsav
"We [Jews] can be the vanguard of culture against [Arab] barbarianism."—Theodore Herzl
"[Muslims are] yelling rabble dressed up in
gaudy, savage rags."—Ze'ev Jabotinsky
"[Gaza will suffer] a bigger Shoah [Holocaust]"—Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai,
shortly before Israel used white phosphorous on Gaza
"We shall use the ultimate force until Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours."—Deputy Prime Minister Rafael Eitan
"[When we build settlements] Arabs will only be able to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle."—Eitan
"We must give them missiles with relish,
annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones."—Rabbi Ovadia Yosef
"The killing [of Palestinians] is a good deed, and Jews should have no compunction about it."—Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg
Ethnic cleansing is a terrible crime against peace and humanity. When
people are made homeless, many of them will die of exposure, disease,
starvation, and crime on the road. Zionists who advocated
ethnic cleansing were clearly sentencing many innocent
people to lives of suffering and premature deaths. To cause the premature
death of an innocent person is murder. To target a large group of people for
premeditated murder is genocide. Herzl's original plan was economic ethnic cleansing, but
is a slow, agonizing death in any way "better" than a quick death? One might
suggest that his method was less humane for many victims than a war in which the
victims at least could see the enemy and fight back. But in any case, the
militant Zionists chose to speed up the process of ethnic cleansing by using
brute force (the Iron Wall).
"We [Zionists] all applaud, day and night, the
IRON WALL."—Ze'ev Jabotinsky, spiritual father of the Likud
"This IRON WALL
is our policy towards the Arabs. To formulate it
any other way would be hypocrisy."—Jabotinsky
"Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must
either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population."—Jabotinsky
"Zionism is a colonizing
adventure and, therefore, it stands or falls on the question of
"The Arab is culturally backward ... his instinctive patriotism ... cannot be
bought, it can only be curbed [by] major force."—Jabotinsky
"There is no justice, no law, no God in heaven; only a single law which
decides and supersedes all: [Jewish] settlement [of the land]."—Jabotinsky
"I devote my life to the rebirth of the Jewish State, with a Jewish majority,
both sides of the Jordan."—Jabotinsky
odious as he is to us—has given this idea [ethnic cleansing] a good name in the world."—Jabotinsky
The last statement is stunning. Did Hitler give ethnic cleansing a "good name"
when ethnic cleansing of German Jews was the first stage of the Holocaust?
Ze'ev Jabotinsky was the spiritual father of Herut and Likud, and of
racist, fascist Israeli prime ministers like Menachem Begin, Ariel Sharon and
Bibi Netanyahu. Jabotinsky did not agree with Herzl that the Palestinians could
be ethnically cleansed via economic methods alone. His "updated" version Zionism
depended on military superiority over Arabs, and brute force. The idea that
"might is right" and that the stronger people can have their way with weaker
people is the hallmark of fascism. Hitler and the Nazis said the same things
about Jews, Gypsies and Slavs.
In 1977 Nahum Goldmann, founder and president of the World Jewish Congress and a
president of the World Zionist Organization, said: “Israel has never presented
the Arabs with a single peace plan. She has rejected every settlement plan
devised by her friends and by her enemies. She has seemingly no other objective
than to preserve the status quo while adding territory piece by piece.”
As we can see, the Zionists were often brutally honest about their intentions. Just as
American white supremacists didn't see anything
wrong with robbing darker-skinned people of their land, water, homes, freedom
and rights ... even so Jewish supremacists didn't see anything "wrong" with
robbing Palestinians of their land, water, homes, freedom and rights.
"The [Palestinian] Arabs do not want us because we want to be the rulers."—Menachem Ussishkin
"Eventually we will have to thin out the number of Palestinians living in the
territories."—General Eitan Ben Elyahu
"The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in 1967 and
that Israel was fighting for its existence is only bluff."—General
"We enthusiastically chose to become a colonialist
society, ignoring international treaties, expropriating lands ... "—Attorney
General Michael Ben-Yair
"We should conquer any disputed territory in the Land of Israel. Conquer and hold
it, even if it brings us years of war."—Benzion Netanyahu
"The tendency toward conflict is in the essence of the Arab."—Netanyahu
"[The Arab's] existence is one of perpetual war."—Netanyahu
"[Operation Cast Lead was] not enough. It’s possible that we should have hit
"There are no two peoples here. There is a Jewish people and an Arab
"There is no Palestinian people, so you don’t create a state for an imaginary
"They only call themselves a people in order to fight the Jews."—Netanyahu
"[Arabs] won’t be able to exist, and they will run away from here. But it all
depends on the war, and whether we will win the battles with them."—Netanyahu
"[Arabs] won’t be able to face war with us, which will include withholding food
from Arab cities, preventing education, terminating electrical power and more."—Netanyahu
The last statement is very important because it echoes what Herzl said in 1895
about getting rid of the poor. And we can see Netanyahu's updated plan in effect
in Gaza, where Palestinian children cannot attend the best schools even if they
win scholarships, and where the electricity is often cut off deliberately for
long periods of time.
Moshe Dayan, Israel's most famous general and defense minister, was very candid
about the real intentions and methods of the Zionists:
Let us not today fling accusation at the murderers. What cause have we to
complain about their fierce hatred to us? For eight years now, they sit in their
refugee camps in Gaza, and before their eyes we turn into our homestead the land
and villages in which they and their forefathers have lived.—Moshe Dayan,
We came to this country which was already populated by Arabs, and we are
establishing a Hebrew, that is a Jewish state here ... There is no one place
built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.—Moshe Dayan,
address given to Technion University students (March 19, 1969), a transcription
of which appeared in Ha'aretz (April 4, 1969)
If you want to make peace, you don't talk to your friends. You talk to your
as quoted in Newsweek (October 17, 1977)
In two cases I did not fulfill my role as defense minister, in that I did not
stop things that I was sure should have been stopped.—Moshe Dayan,
on not stopping the construction of Israeli settlements
on the Golan Heights and in Hebron, in a 1976 interview with Rami Tal, as quoted
in Associated Press reports (May 11, 1997)
Along the Syria border there were no farms and no refugee camps; there was only
the Syrian army ... The kibbutzim saw the good agricultural land ... and they
dreamed about it ... They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land ...
We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do
anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would
start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance
further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we
would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was ...The
Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.— Moshe Dayan,
pre-1967 clashes with the Syrians, in a 1976 interview with Rami Tal, as quoted
in The New York Times and Associated Press reports (May 11, 1997)
Using the moral yardstick mentioned by [Moshe Sharett], I must ask: Are [we
justified] in opening fire on the Arabs who cross [the border] to reap the crops
they planted in our territory; they, their women, and their children? Will this
stand up to moral scrutiny . . .? We shoot at those from among the 200,000
hungry Arabs who cross the line ... will this stand up to moral review? Arabs
cross to collect the grain that they left in the abandoned villages and we set
mines for them and they go back without an arm or a leg ... [It may be that
this] cannot pass review, but I know no other method of guarding the borders.
then tomorrow the State of Israel will have no borders.—Moshe Dayan,
on the anti-infiltration policy against Palestinian refugees in the early 1950s
The only method that proved effective, not justified or moral but effective,
when Arabs plant mines on our side [is retaliation]. If we try to search for the
[particular] Arab [who planted mines], it has not value. But if we harass the
nearby village ... then the population there comes out against the
[infiltrators] ... and the Egyptian Government and the Transjordanian Government
are [driven] to prevent such incidents, because their prestige is [assailed], as
the Jews have opened fire, and they are unready to begin a war ... the method of
collective punishment so far has proved effective.—Moshe Dayan
All that is required is to find an officer, even a captain would do, to win
his heart or buy him with money to get him to agreed to declare himself the
savior of the Maronite population. Then the Israeli army will enter Lebanon,
occupy the necessary territory, create a Christian regime that will ally itself
with Israel. The territory from Litani southward will be totally annexed to
Israel, and everything will fall into place. While trying to work out a plan to
internally destabilize Lebanon in favor of a Christian-Maronite government.—Moshe
A new State of Israel with broad frontiers, strong and solid, with the
authority of the Israel Government extending from the Jordan to the Suez Canal.—Moshe
statement made in April 1973 from the peaks of Massada
During the last 100 years our people have been in a process of building up the
country and the nation, of expansion, of getting additional Jews and additional
settlements in order to expand the borders here. Let no Jew say that the process
has ended. Let no Jew say that we are near the end of the road.—Moshe Dayan, Ma'ariv,
7 July 1968
Moshe Dayan unfolded one plan after another for direct action. The first —
what should be done to force open blockade of the Gulf of Eilat. A ship flying
the Israeli flag should be sent, and if the Egyptians bomb it, we should bomb
the Egyptian base from the air, or conquer Ras al-Naqb, or open our way south of
Gaza Strip to the coast. There was a general uproar. I asked Moshe: Do you
realize that this would mean war with Egypt?, he said: Of course.—Moshe Sharett, as quoted in
Iron Wall (1999) by Avi Shlaim, on a suggestion in the mid-1950s to
lure Egypt into a war to neutralize the modernization of its army
Moshe Dayan saw no need for American guarantees of Israel's security and
strongly opposed America's conditions i.e. that Israel forswear territorial
expansion and military retaliation. In an informal talk with the ambassadors to
Washington, London, and Paris, Dayan describe military retaliations as a "life
drug" to the Israel Army. First, it obliged the Arab governments to take drastic
measures to protect their borders. Second, and this was the essence, it enabled
the Israeli government to maintain a high degree of tension in the country and
the army. Gideaon Rafael, also present at the meeting with Dayan, remarked to
Moshe Sharett: "This is how fascism began in Italy and Germany!"—Iron Wall (1999) by Avi Shlaim
Rocking the boat is his favorite tactic, not to overturn it, but to sway it
sufficiently for the helmsman to lose his grip or for some of its unwanted
passengers to fall overboard.—Ambassador Gideon Rafael, about Dayan
The disciples of Herzl and Jabotinsky firmly believed in their "right" to
ethnically cleanse Palestinians and rob them of their land, homes, property,
water, natural resources, human rights and freedom. The only real difference of
opinion was about the methods to be used. Herzl favored being circumspect and
discreet, operating in the shadows and using Jewish money and global political
influence to rob the Palestinians of their jobs and ability to make money, after
which they would be forced to leave the Jewish state, surrendering the land they
could not afford to rent. Jabotinsky disagreed, saying that the Zionists should
use superior firepower to take whatever they wanted, then continually crush the
will and spirit of the Palestinians. This has been Israel's modus operandi
since the day Israel became a state.
I am an editor and publisher of Holocaust poetry, and obviously not an
anti-Semite. I have always opposed racism and racial injustices, in part because
my family has Native American blood. My grandmother was so dark and
exotic-looking that people called her Gypsy. My father was also dark with
jet-black hair, although it is white today. Our family staunchly supported
Israel until I became the "black sheep" after reading the incredibly racist
statements by leading Zionists on this page, and realizing that Israel has been
treating Palestinians the way my ancestors were once treated by the white
supremacists running the U.S. government during the Trail of Tears ...
In an interview with the Sunday Times published on June 15, 1969, Israeli Prime Minister Golda
Meir said, "It is not as though there was a Palestinian people ... and we came and threw them
out and took their country away from them ... they did not exist."
(Also reported in the Washington Post, June 16, 1969)
A few months earlier Meir (known as "Mother Israel") had asked rhetorically, "How can we return the held territories? There is
nobody to return them to." (March 8, 1969). Her
incredibly racist comment has recently been repeated by American presidential
candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.
Now please suppose that you were a Palestinian child, facing the
accumulated might, hypocrisy and zealous fury of Israel and the United States:
... how would you feel? Wouldn't it be terrifying to hear the leaders of nuclear-armed nations
calmly suggesting that you don't exist, or at least not in the same way that
other people exist?
Perhaps now we can understand why so many Palestinian children feel a sense of
overwhelming despair, and why some of them sometimes blow themselves and other
people to pieces.
We can also understand why great humanitarians like Albert Einstein (a Jew), Gandhi,
Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Jimmy Carter, Noam Chomsky (a Jew), and Norman
Finkelstein (a Jew) have been harshly, sternly and publicly critical of Israeli racism
against Palestinians. Why do the leaders of Israel sound like the Grand Wizards
of the KKK when they talk about Palestinian children?
Bigotry, the Sacred Disease
The problem with Golda Meir's hideous statements above, and with hundreds of similar statements by high-ranking Israelis to follow,
if you continue reading on this page, is obvious: bigotry. Heraclitus called bigotry the "sacred disease."
Israel has turned bigotry into a state religion which now threatens not only
Palestinian children, but Jewish and American children as well. Americans, by
acquiescing to demands that they consider only the rights of Jews while ignoring
the self-evident rights of Palestinians, have endangered American
children. If you care about all the children of the world, and the future of the world they are
destined to live in, I hope you will bear with me for a few minutes and
allow me to explain why Golda Meir said what she said, why she was wrong, and what we can do about it.
"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail."
—Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, Feb. 27, 1994
"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that .
. . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure
on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."
—Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as
reported on Kol Yisrael radio
"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China,
when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among
the Arabs of the territories."
—Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israel's Deputy Foreign
Minister, speaking to students at Bar Ilan
University, as published in the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24,
In 1923, radical Zionist Ze'ev Jabotinsky—spiritual father of the Likud, and
Israeli Prime Ministers Menachem Begin and Bibi Netanyahu—wrote
that the "sole way" for Jews to deal with Arabs in Palestine was through "total
avoidance of all attempts to arrive at a settlement," which Jabotinsky
euphemistically termed the "iron wall" approach. Not coincidentally, a picture
of Jabotinsky graced Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's desk. Source: The Village
Voice, "Death Wish in the Holy Land," Dec. 12, 2001
During a sermon preceding the 2001 Passover holiday, the influential Israeli
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef exclaimed: "May the Holy Name visit retribution on the Arab
heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them." He added: "It is
forbidden to have pity on them. We must give them missiles with relish,
annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones." Source: Ha'aretz April 12, 2001
"We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter
of Eretz Israel ... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the
ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours."—Rafael
Eitan, chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, quoted in Yediot Ahronot,
April 13, 1983, and The New York Times, April 14, 1983.
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."—Israeli Prime Minister
Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the
'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982
"We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do
return."—Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, July 18, 1948, quoted in Michael Bar
Zohar's "Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet," Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
"We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and
waiters."—Uri Lubrani, Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion's special adviser
on Arab Affairs. Source: "The Arabs in Israel" by Sabri Jiryas
"The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want
more."—Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel, August 28, 2000.
Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000.
"...the need to sustain the character of the state which will henceforth be
Jewish ... with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15 percent. I had already reached
this fundamental position as early as 1940 [and] it is entered in my
diary."—Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency's Colonization Department.
From "Israel: an Apartheid State" by Uri Davis, p. 5
"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many (Palestinian) hilltops as they can
to enlarge the (Jewish) settlements because everything we take now will stay
ours ... Everything we don't grab will go to them."—Ariel Sharon, Israeli
Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of the Tsomet Party, Agence France
Presse, Nov. 15, 1998
"Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment ...
Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried
out discreetly and circumspectly."—Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist
Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine, in his diary, June 12, 1895
Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, head of the Kever Yossev Yeshiva (school of Talmud) in
Nablus stated, "The blood of the Jewish people is loved by the Lord; it is
therefore redder and their life is preferable."
Ginsburg declares in Baruch Hagever that what Baruch Goldstein did in murdering
unarmed Palestinian civilians at their house of worship constitutes, "a
fulfillment of a number of commands of Jewish religious law ... Among his
(Goldstein's) good deeds, as enumerated, are ... taking revenge on non-Jews,
extermination of the non-Jews who are from the seed of Amalek ... and the
sanctification of the Holy Name. The murders have led, in the rabbi's opinion, to clear knowledge among the
Jews that "the life of a Jew is preferable to the life of a non-Jew..."
The Israeli Chief Rabbi of the Sephardim, Eliahu Bakshi Doron, in a radio
broadcast on Tuesday, July 9, 1996, praised the Biblical figure Phinehas for
having killed the Israelite Zimri, because Zimri had sex with a Midianite woman.
Rabbi Doron said that Phinehas had committed a "pure" act. He then referred to
Zimri as "the first reform Jew."
"Foreign Minister Shimon Peres is very worried about the expected international
reaction as soon as the world learns the details of the tough battle in the
Jenin refugee camp." It added that Israeli Defense Force (IDF) officers have
similar worries: "The bulldozers are simply 'shaving' the homes and causing
terrible destruction. When the world sees the pictures of what we have done
there, it will do us immense damage."
—April 9th, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz
"Every time we do something you tell me America will do
this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very
clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel.
We, the Jewish people, control America, and the
Americans know it."
— Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001,
to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio.
Ben-Gurion stated in 1937, during the Arab revolt:
"This is a national war declared upon us by the Arabs. ... This is an active
resistance by the Palestinians to what they regard as a usurpation of their
homeland by the Jews. ...But the fighting is only one aspect of the conflict,
which is in its essence a political one. And politically we are the aggressors
and they defend themselves."
"You cannot define the loss of human life in terms of the number of Israelis
killed by brutal, savage, inexcusable Palestinian terror. And it does take
place. The fact of the matter is that three times as many Palestinians have been
killed, and a relatively small number of them were really militants. Most were
civilians. Some hundreds of children." —Zbigniew Brzezinski, U.S.
National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter
"A partial Jewish State is not the end, but only the beginning. I am certain
that we can not be prevented from settling in the other parts of the country and
—David Ben Gurion, in a letter to his son, 1937
"There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to neighboring
countries, all of them. Not one village, not one tribe should be left."
—Joseph Weitz, the head of the Jewish Agency's Colonization Department, which
was responsible for the organization of settlements in Palestine, 1940
"The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates. It includes
parts of Syria and Lebanon."
—Rabbi Fischmann, a member of the Jewish Agency for
Palestine, in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry, 1947
"Before (the Palestinians) very eyes we are possessing the land and the villages
where they and their ancestors have lived We are the generation of colonizers
and without the steel helmet and the gun barrel we cannot plant a tree and build
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and
threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
—Golda Meir, in a
statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June 1969.
"I have learned that the state of Israel cannot be ruled in our generation
without deceit and adventurism."
—Moshe Sharett, Israel's first Foreign
Minister and later Prime Minister (p.51 Simha Flapan, "The Birth of Israel",
Chaim Weizmann, Israel's First President
Chaim Weizmann (1874-1952) was a Russia-born Jew. In 1904 he emigrated to
England. During WWI, he developed a method of producing acetone, which was
required for the production of artillery shells. This earned him favor with the
British government. In 1917 he helped secure the promise of the British
create a "Jewish National Home" in Palestine (the Balfour Declaration). Along
with Theodor Herzl and David Ben-Gurion, Chaim Weizmann was one of the "big
three" responsible for making political Zionism a reality. Weizmann was a charismatic,
persuasive speaker who became the first president of Israel.
But Weizmann sometimes sounded like Hitler:
"We will establish ourselves in Palestine whether you
like it or
not ...You can hasten our arrival or you can equally
retard it. It is however
better for you to help us so as to avoid our
constructive powers being
turned into a destructive power which will overthrow the
Weizmann, "Judische Rundschau," No. 4,
In 1914, Weizmann lied, saying Palestine was "a country without people" when in
fact hundreds of thousands of Palestinians lived there:
"In its initial stage, Zionism was conceived by its
pioneers as a movement wholly depending on mechanical factors: there is a
country which happens to be called Palestine, a country without people, and, on
the other hand, there exists the Jewish people, and it has no country. What else
is necessary, then, than to fit the gem into the ring, to unite this people with
this country? The owners of the country [the Ottoman Turks] must, therefore, be
persuaded and conceived that this marriage is advantageous, not only for the
[Jewish] people and for the country, but also for themselves." (Expulsion Of The
Palestinians, p. 6)
Other Zionists like Golda Meir would also claim that the Palestinians
didn’t really exist, were not a people, did not constitute a nation, etc. They
sounded like Nazis who denied the humanity of Jews.
Weizmann described the Palestinian people as inhuman steppingstones:
"the rocks of Judea ... obstacles that had to be cleared
on a difficult path." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 17)
Zionists often use such dehumanizing language, referring
to Palestinians as: dirty, unclean, primitive, uncultured, naive, ignorant, savage, a "demographic problem,"
and as "ticking time bombs" (because they might have babies and outnumber
Weizmann visited Jerusalem in late 1918, and described
the ultra-orthodox Jewish neighborhoods to his wife:
"There's nothing more humiliating than 'our' Jerusalem.
Anything that could be done to desecrate and defile the sacred has been done. It
is impossible to imagine so much falsehood, blasphemy, greed, so many lies. It's
such an accursed city, there's nothing there, no creature comforts ... [It]
hasn't a single clean and comfortable apartment." (One Palestine Complete, p.
So it seems Jewish "superiority" was just a racial myth, as racial superiority
Also in 1918 Weizmann condescendingly criticized Arabs for believing in
what actually ended up happening to them:
"The poor ignorant fellah [Arabic for peasant] does not
worry about politics, but when he is told repeatedly by people in whom he has
confidence that his livelihood is in danger of being taken away from him by us,
he becomes our mortal enemy... The Arab is primitive and believes what he is
told." (One Palestine Complete, p. 109)
The Zionists seemed to be blind to their own racism. They admitted that the Jews
far from "superior," then looked down their snooty noses at Arabs who were smart enough to
figure out what they were actually up to.
In 1919 at the peace conference at Versailles, Weizmann
proved Arabs were correct in their assumptions, saying:
"the country [Palestine] should be Jewish in the same
way that France is French and Britain is British." (One Palestine Complete, p.
Weizmann repeated the same idea to the English Zionist
Federation on September 19, 1919:
"By a Jewish National Home I mean the creation of such
conditions that as the country is developed we can pour in a considerable number
of immigrants, and finally establish such a society in Palestine that Palestine
shall be as Jewish as England is English or America American." (Expulsion Of The
Palestinians, p. 41)
But in the early 1900s, Zionism was not popular with most Jews; it was the
dream of small numbers of zealots who often emulated the philosophy,
stratagems and methods of Hitler:
"The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was built on air ...
every day and every hour of these last ten years, when opening the newspapers, I
thought: Whence will the next blow come? I trembled lest the British Government
would call me and ask: 'Tell us, what is this Zionist Organization? Where are
they, your Zionists?' ... The Jews, they knew, were against us [the Zionists];
we stood alone on a little island, a tiny group of Jews with a foreign past."
(UN: The Origins And Evolution Of The Palestine Problem, section V)
The Holocaust changed things, and understandably so. But it
was the Zionists who insisted that Jews not only resettle in Palestine, but
drive out the Palestinians and seize control of the region. On May 25, 1942,
"Palestine alone could absorb and provide for the
homeless and the stateless Jews uprooted by the war. It [has galvanized] all the
sympathy of the world for the martyrdom of the Jews ... the Zionists reject all
schemes to resettle these victims elsewhere—in Germany, or Poland, or in
sparsely populated regions such as Madagascar." [It was Hitler who had first
suggested Madagascar as a place where the Jews of Europe might be sent,
before writing off the idea as infeasible and coming up with his horrendous
"final solution."] (Israel: A History, p. 113)
So, in effect, the Zionists used the Holocaust to
provide the "warm bodies" needed for a Jewish state. To be fair, it was going to
be very difficult for most of the Jewish refugees, no matter where they went.
And there were millions of non-Jewish displaced persons as well. Their suffering
is often forgotten, but shouldn't be. The problem was not that the world was
insensitive to the plight of Jews and other displaced persons. The problem was
that the world was recovering from a world war that had left perhaps 70 million
people dead, millions more displaced, and much of Europe and Russia a mass of
smoking ruins. But the Zionists put their racist agenda on a pedestal, and thus created
tremendous suffering for Jews and Arabs alike. Nothing mandated Jewish refugees
seizing control of the regions that granted them safe harbor. Only Palestine
suffered that fate. Everywhere else they went the Jews became democrats who asked
for equal rights, and increasingly received them. But they were unwilling to
settle for democracy in Palestine; thus to the rest of the world they seem
hypocritical. If they want equal rights for themselves, how can they deny equal
rights to other people? Is that fair?
Weizmann tried to extend Zionist colonization beyond British Mandated Palestine.
In 1934 he tried to interest the French Mandate authorities in a Jewish
settlement plan for Syria and Lebanon. Similar ideas were also proposed by
Ben-Gurion and Moshe Dayan. (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 47)
Weizmann informed the Peel Commission of his expansionist
vision in 1937:
"We shall spread in the whole country in the course of
time ... this is only an arrangement for the next 25 to 30 years." (Expulsion
Of The Palestinians, p. 62)
Weizmann fantasized about Palestinians leaving
voluntarily, writing in a letter dated April 28, 1939 to the American Zionist
"The realization of this project [a land purchase] would
mean the emigration of 10,000 [Palestinian] Arabs [to Jabal al-Druze in Syria],
the acquisition of 300,000 dunums ... It would also create a significant
precedent if 10,000 Arabs were to emigrate peacefully of their own
volition, which no doubt would be followed by others." (Expulsion Of The
Palestinians, p. 167)
On July 8, 1947, Weizmann described how stateless Jews
felt, to UNSCOP (the UN Special Committee On Palestine):
"We ask today: 'What are the Poles? What are the French?
What are the Swiss?' When that is asked, everyone points to a country, to
certain institution, to parliamentary institution, and the man in the street
will know exactly what it is. He has a passport. If you ask what is a Jew is—well,
he is a man who has to offer a long explanation for his existence, and any
person who has to offer an explanation as to what he is, is always suspect—and from suspicion there is only one step to hatred or contempt." (Israel: A
History, p. 147)
But of course this is how stateless, dispossessed Palestinians feel today.
Why should we elevate the needs, desires and feelings of Jews above those of
By war's end in 1949, Chaim Weizmann was ecstatic to see the long-anticipated
ethnic cleansing of Palestinians a reality:
"a miraculous clearing of the land: the miraculous simplification of Israel's
task." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 175)
What sort of man speaks of the ethnic cleansing and
murders of human beings—including women and children—as the
"simplification" of a task? What does that sound like, but the cold hard "math"
of Hitler & Company? How can ethnic cleansing and attempted genocide be
Here are the opinions of the Elders of the human race:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."—Thomas Jefferson
"Now is the time to make justice a reality for
of God's children."—Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
"The cause of unrest in Palestine, the only cause,
arises from the Zionist movement ..."—Winston Churchill
"A Zionist state in Palestine can only be installed and maintained by force and
we should not be a party to it."—Franklin Roosevelt
"I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of
living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state."—Albert Einstein
"What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of
"I have no doubt that they [the Jews] are going about it the wrong way."—Mahatma Gandhi
"... they are ... despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them."—Mahatma
"I wish they had chosen non-violence ... but according to the accepted canons of
right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of
overwhelming odds."—Mahatma Gandhi
Why American children are endangered, and all the children of the world
Golda Meir said that Israel is above the law:
"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It
would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy."
But please consider what Golda Meir's racism, fascism and fanaticism may
mean for the world's children, as evidenced in this exchange with Alan Hart, the author of
Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews:
Hart: "I recall the words spoken to me many years ago by Golda Meir, Mother Israel, when
she was prime minister. At a point during an interview I did with her for the
BBC’s Panorama programme, I interrupted her to ask, “Prime Minister, I want to be sure I understand what
you’re saying … You are saying that if Israel was ever in danger of being
defeated on the battlefield, it would be prepared to take the region and the whole world down with it?"
Meir "without the shortest of pauses for reflection, and in the gravel
voice that could charm or intimidate American Presidents according to need"
replied: “Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying.”
Hart: "Within an hour of that interview being transmitted at eight o’clock on a Monday
evening, The Times (pre-Murdoch and not then a cheerleader for Zionism) had changed its lead editorial.
Its new editorial quoted what Golda had said to me, [adding] its own opinion:
'We had better believe her.' I did, and still do."
Should we believe Alan Hart? I, for one, do. I remember reading Robert Fisk's
book The Great War for Civilisation with a sense of growing horror. In
it, Fisk mentioned seeing high-ranking American diplomats like Colin Powell and
Madeline Albright acting deferentially, even fearfully, around Israeli
politicians. Considering the normal operating mode of American
politicians—hubris—that seems hard to believe, unless Israel has been
threatening to use nuclear weapons. When I put two and two together, it seems to me that Israel has
told the United States, "Unless we are allowed to have our way with
Palestinians, and the world acquiesces to our brutal, unjust treatment of them,
we are willing to unleash a nuclear Armageddon on the world."
Does this mean Israel can hold the entire world hostage? No, I
believe there is a peaceful, nonviolent solution to the Israeli/Palestinian
conflict. Please allow me to explain ...
How soon they forget
"Have our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation?
Have they forgotten the collective punishment,
the home demolitions,
in their own history so soon?
Have they turned their backs
on their profound and noble religious traditions?"
A Simple Program for Peace
All too often the people on one side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict bitterly criticize
people on the other side, and nothing good results. My goal is not to condemn
anyone for the sake of condemnation, nor is it to win an argument; my goal is to
find a positive, peaceful solution. Yes, I believe Israel and the United States
need to cure themselves of the sacred disease of bigotry, and I convinced that doing so
requires honesty rather than hypocrisy. But I believe positive change is
possible, so please allow me to present my "simple program for peace." Hopefully
this will persuade you that, while I strongly oppose what Israel and the United
States have done in the past, and continue to do in the present, I am not
here to merely vent. And please keep in mind that "simple" does not mean "easy." Here's
•Israelis and Americans need to be honest about what really happened to the
Palestinians: the ethnic cleansing of the Nakba. The Nakba (Arabic for
"Catastrophe") has been ongoing since 1948; thus entire generations of
Palestinian children have been born and lived (and now many of those children have died) without
having ever drawn a free breath. How would we feel, if this was the case for our
• Israel needs to unconditionally grant Palestinians
equal rights and the protection of fair (nonracist) laws and courts. Why?
Because every human child is self-evidently entitled to equal rights and
justice, and on this planet justice requires fair laws and courts. There can
never be racial peace where there is racial injustice, so establishing fair laws
and courts is absolutely necessary if Israel wants peace, and if Americans want
to avoid more events like 9-11 and more unwinnable wars abroad.
• Americans must understand that it is not "unfair" to require
Israeli Jews to do what Americans did themselves, when the United States finally
abandoned government-sanctioned racism in the form of Jim Crow laws and kangaroo
• Because Israel's leader seem to be either unwilling or
unable to "pull the trigger" and treat Palestinians as human beings with fully
equal rights, they need encouragement from the United States and the world to
start moving in the right direction. Fortunately, there is a simple way for the
world to encourage Israel to take the all-important first step of treating
everyone as equals. The solution is a new UN resolution based on the American
Creed of equal rights and justice for all human beings. No American president
can veto the American Creed, so this new UN resolution should pass, where so many
others have been short-circuited. Such a resolution backed by economic sanctions
(which will hopefully not be needed, once Israel reads "the writing on the wall")
will force Israel to either make the Palestinians full citizens of a single
state, or grant them independence. If you don't understand why this plan will
work, please check out the Burch-Elberry Peace Initiative for more details.
The "logic" of racism, fascism and fanaticism
Now, getting back to Golda Meir's idea that Palestinians are nobodies who never
really existed: something is obviously wrong with her "logic," if we can call it that. If the Palestinians didn't exist, it makes no
sense to say that they weren't thrown out and that their country wasn't taken from them. If
there never were beings called Martians, would it make any sense for me to say, "Martians
never did exist, and by the way I didn't throw them out in order to steal their planet"? Of course
not. Golda Meir was obviously lying, for a
specific purpose, or she was trying to rationalize
something that seems utterly alien to those of us who believe that all earth's children
are created equal. Having read her autobiography, a book written about her
by her son, a number of other books in which she played important roles, and
hundreds of other books and articles about Israel, Palestine, Zionism and the
history of the Middle East, I believe I know enough to suggest that she was
rationalizing. What she really meant probably goes something like this: "We
Jews have a long, glorious history as a civilization with a superior culture.
But the Palestinians are just a disorganized rabble with an inferior culture, so
we don't consider them to be our equals, or even close. Therefore, because they
are not really a 'people' compared to us, we have the right to take their land
by force, evict them, and keep them from ever returning. Their suffering means
little or nothing, compared to our achievements, since we are a 'people' and
they are not."
In other words, she was a racist and a fascist.
And unfortunately most of the other leaders of Israel since its rebirth as a
nation in 1948 have also been fascists. I can prove this quite easily, simply by quoting what
they said, discussing what they did, and showing how their words and deeds meshed,
and betrayed them as racists and fascists. How do know that Hitler was a fascist? All we have to do is
read what he said and consider what he did. Hitler was a racist and a fascist because he
believed Aryans were "superior" to all other races, and that because they were
"superior" they were entitled to seize lebensraum ("living room") from
other races, using any degree of force and brutality
necessary, even against women and children. Although Hitler did not plan to
commit genocide at first, in the end he realized that the Jews had nowhere to
go, and that it was going to be very expensive to keep millions of them alive
perpetually. Hence, his horrendous "final solution." But it all began with the
same utterly alien idea that Golda Meir expressed above: that people of other races
were "nobodies" who didn't really "exist" or "matter" because they fell far
short of the "glory" of the "Master Race."
What does Israeli fascism mean, for the Children of Gaza?
What does Israeli fascism mean for the children of Gaza and Occupied Palestine,
as Israel takes more and more of their land and they, too, have nowhere else to
go? I believe the end result will inevitably be the same: genocide,
extermination ... unless the world acts to keep it from
Does this mean that Israel is beyond hope? No. Please consider Germany at the
end of World War II. Millions of Jews, Gypsies, Slavs and other "undesirables"
had been murdered during the Holocaust. Perhaps 70 million people had died
worldwide. Much of Germany lay in smoldering ruins. But after the Allies forced
Germany to establish fair laws and courts, a new Germany soon emerged from the
rubble. The people were the same. Many Jews continued to live in Germany, and
there was no sudden outpouring of affection between them and Germans. Far from
it. (Most of the Jewish Holocaust survivors I've talked to have great disdain
for the Germans, to this day.) What saved Germany and allowed a new Germany to
emerge was not a sudden change of human hearts, but a far better and fairer form
of government based on the idea that all human beings are equal, and thus deserve the
protections of fair laws and courts.
Does it bother me that Golda Meir spoke like a fascist? Yes, it does. Does it
bother me that so many other high-ranking Israelis sound and act like fascists?
Yes, it does. But I know that America has its share of fascists, and yet they are
virtually powerless. Why? Because if they break the law, they go to jail and/or
pay fines and civil damages. While no one can change the prejudices of another
person's heart, a decent system of government can protect people from those
And I also know something else that I consider very promising: when Golda Meir
lived in the United States she was a firm believer in democracy; furthermore, when
Israeli Jews come to the United States they almost invariably become firm, even
devout, believers in equal rights for all human beings. While they may seem
terribly hypocritical today, there is hope. The hope is that Israel will adopt a
far better, fairer form of government. The day Israel establishes fair laws and
courts, its terrible problems with racial injustice and violence will begin to
ameliorate, as was the case in Germany after WWII and in the United States once
its Jim Crow laws and kangaroo courts were finally laid to rest by the reforms
of the American Civil Rights Movement.
And finally, not being a racist, I know there are many Jews of good conscience
who do not support the racism, fascism and fanaticism of Israel's current
government. We have to remember that the United States was far from a true
democracy for most of its existence, as it denied equal rights to women, blacks
and other minorities. Even today the United States still has not granted fully
equal rights to non-heterosexuals. But the United States has made considerable
progress since the American Civil Rights Movement of the mid 1900s. This implies
that Israel can also make considerable progress in a relatively short period of
time, if only it will establish equal rights and the protection of fair laws and
courts for everyone. The Burch-Elberry Peace Initiative
explains how this can be accomplished.
But what about Israel today, and this modern Trail of Tears?
"I equated the ejection of Palestinians
from their previous homes within the State of Israel
to the forcing of Lower Creek Indians
from the Georgia land where our family farm was now located;
they had been moved west to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears
to make room for our white ancestors."
Israel's hypocrisy is a very real problem. According to Golda Meir's
reprehensible "logic," Germans had the right to
confiscate the land, houses and property of Jews, to sweep them into squalid
ghettos and concentration camps, and to keep them from ever returning to "polite
society," simply by claiming that German civilization and culture were
"superior" to Jewish civilization and culture.
"As to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza ...
the so-called 'Palestinian autonomous areas' are bantustans.
These are restricted entities
within the power structure of the Israeli apartheid
Of course Jews insist that
what the Nazis did to them during the Holocaust was wrong, and of course they
are absolutely correct to do so. But it seems that many Jews want to have their cake and eat
other people's cake too.
Whenever anti-Semitism is practiced against Jews, they insist that anti-Semitism is
wrong. (I agree.) But whenever they practice
anti-Semitism against Arabs, they try to justify their
reprehensible behavior by falling back on the grotesque logic of
Hitler and the Nazis. (I disagree.) Obviously Hitler was either wrong or right,
and today everyone who's not a racist and a fascist knows he was wrong. But isn't it passing
strange that enough Jews agree with Hitler to keep Palestinians in chains, and
the world on the brink of World War III?
On a Christmas visit to Jerusalem in 1989,
Desmond Tutu said that if the colors and names were changed
"a description of what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank
could describe events in South Africa."
He also said that he was "very deeply distressed"
by his visit to the Holy Land,
because "it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South
He made similar comments in 2002,
"the humiliation of
the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks,
suffering like us when
young white police officers prevented us from moving about."
If a Jewish professor anywhere in the world is slighted, legions of Jewish
activists fire off aggrieved emails about the evils and dangers of
anti-Semitism. (Well and good.) But if Jewish "settlers" and the Israeli military practice
anti-Semitism against little Palestinian schoolgirls, spitting on them and
cursing them as they trudge their way to kindergarten, somehow that
doesn't "count." (Why?)
It bothers me greatly to think of little children being shamed and humiliated by adults. My
business partner is a fine young black man. When I made him a partner in the
business I own, he told me an illuminating story. He said that when his father
was a little boy growing up in Mississippi, he was commanded to call little
white boys "Sir." I have never forgotten that story, and I think about it often.
When I learned that Jewish robber barons were insulting, spitting on and
sometimes abusing Palestinian children on their way to school, I thought of the
dark days of racism in the South, when little black boys and girls had to face
the bigotry of white adults. How do such things make you feel?
If such things don't bother you, I fear we are of two different species. If they
do bother you ― if they bother you a lot, as they do me ―
then please keep in mind my idea about a new UN resolution based on the American
Creed of equal rights and justice for all human beings. All children who are abused, shamed and humiliated by adult bigots need
and deserve the protections of fair laws and courts.
Don't you agree?
Israeli racism and hypocrisy
Here's another racist remark by Golda Meir: "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children
more than they hate us." (As quoted in Media Bias and the Middle East by
Paul Carlson, p. 10, and The Agony of the Promised Land by
Joshua Levy, p. 187)
The racist assumptions here are that Jews love their children, that Palestinians don't, and that
Palestinian resistance to Jewish domination is based on racial "hatred"
rather than on the honest, loving desire of Palestinians for their children to
experience the freedom Americans value so highly. But of course the
American Founding Fathers rebelled against and forcefully resisted the British
monarchy, imperiling their children. Did this mean the American Founding Fathers were
inferior beings who didn't love their children? Or does it suggest that
imperialist regimes like those of King George and Golda Meir make it very
difficult for parents to raise their children, since they force them to choose
between raising their children as serfs or imperiling their lives?
Once again Golda Meir's words betray her racism, her fascism and her fanaticism. And
once again they also betray her
hypocrisy, and Israel's hypocrisy, because Meir and other high-ranking Zionists
clearly ascribed a
much higher value to creating a Jewish state than they did to the welfare and
happiness of the children of Israel. Please consider the evidence below,
which I turned up during my research for this article.
I was born in 1958, so on a whim I decided to see what Golda Meir was up to in 1958. To my
surprise, when I did a Google search for "Golda Meir 1958" the top four stories,
according to Google, were about Golda Meir preventing sick and disabled
Jews from emigrating to Israel! Like Hitler, it seems she only valued Jews who were able to work for a fascist
state that valued their productivity over their humanity. The Jews who unable to work,
including children, could either languish, rot, or die. Here's an article on the subject, by
one of Israel's leading newspapers, followed by commentary from other sources:
Golda Meir told Poland: Don't send sick or disabled Jews to Israel!
December 9, 2009
by Lily Galili, Haaretz Correspondent
In 1958, then-foreign minister Golda Meir raised the possibility of preventing
handicapped and sick Polish Jews from immigrating to Israel, a recently
discovered Foreign Ministry document has revealed.
"A proposal was raised in the coordination committee to inform the Polish
government that we want to institute selection in aliyah [the
immigration of Jews to Palestine], because we cannot
continue accepting sick and handicapped people. Please give your opinion as to
whether this can be explained to the Poles without hurting immigration," read
the document, written by Meir to Israel's ambassador to Poland, Katriel Katz.
The letter, marked "top secret" and written in April 1958, shortly after Meir
became foreign minister, was uncovered by Prof. Szymon Rudnicki, a Polish
historian at the University of Warsaw.
In recent years, Rudnicki has been researching documents shedding light on
Israeli-Polish relations between 1945 and 1967.
The document had not been known to exist before this time, and scholars of the
mass immigration from Poland to Israel that took place from 1956 to 1958 were
unaware of Israel's intent to impose a selection process on Jews leaving Poland
[most of whom were] survivors of the Holocaust and its death camps.
The "coordination committee" Meir refers to was a joint panel consisting of
representatives of the government and the Jewish Agency.
Rudnicki's study, undertaken together with Israeli scholars headed by Prof.
Marcos Silber of the University of Haifa, has already been published in a book
The Hebrew version of the book will be published in a few months. However, the
document containing the suggestion about the selection process does not appear
in the book because it did not impact relations between the two countries.
"Although there are numerous documents on the issue of immigration, we did not
find in the archives of Israel or Poland—where they also opened the party
archive for us—any response to this request by Golda to the ambassador in
Poland," Rudnicki told Haaretz. "In this respect, the document remains an
internal matter of Israel," he said.
However, Rudnicki concedes that the content of the document surprised him as a
scholar and a Jew.
"This is a very cynical document," he said. "It is known that Golda was a brutal politician who
defended interests more than people."
[But as we shall see, this fascist, Stalinistic preference for the needs of the
state over the happiness of individuals lies at the core of Zionism.]
Commentary from other sources
Israel's George Washington, David Ben-Gurion, also ranked the goals of Zionism
and a fascist state far above the lives and happiness of Jewish children,
saying: "If I knew that it was possible to save all the children
of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them
to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only
the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of
Israel." (Quoted on pp 855-56 of Shabtai Teveth's Ben-Gurion)
"Golda Meir struck me as a very impressive and persuasive personality, though she has shown little or no understanding for the
Arabs of Palestine or for the justice of their demands. She has always talked a
great deal about the 'historical and spiritual rights of the Jews', but it is
difficult to accept the validity of 'historic rights' which can only be achieved
at the expense of people who have been living in the same place for 2,000 years.
The principle which she applies on behalf of the Jews, and by which she
justifies the expulsion of the Palestinians, would, if applied elsewhere, reduce
the world to a state of total chaos." (General Odd Bull, former Chief of Staff
of UNTSO, War and Peace in the Middle East, p.42)
There will be those who are shocked at the revelation that Golda Meir, whose
grandmotherly appearance belied a cold and cynical persona, told Poland under
the Stalinists not to send sick or disabled Jews to the 'Jewish State'.
My friend Mark Elf, of Jews sans frontieres [Jews without borders] attributes
this to eugenicism and he is right. But that is not the whole story. Throughout
the Nazi era a policy of selectivity operated. Rescuing the elite at the expense
of the masses. Israel only wanted, as Arthur Ruppin put it, the cream of the
Jewish Diaspora. 'Good human material' no less. Golda Meir's attitude to the
sick and disabled was little different from that of Hitler, who described them
as being 'useless mouths' who were to be 'awarded' a merciful death ... [it was]
Meir who launched the Zionist counteroffensive at the 1938 Evian
Conference. This conference was designed to put a gloss and halo around the
Western countries in their refusal to admit the Jewish refugees from Nazi
Germany. The Zionists were outraged that they weren't invited as representatives
of the Jews, despite being a tiny minority at that time. They were also worried—what if countries do accept refugees: won't that negate
the need for a Jewish State? They needn't have worried because no country bar tiny San Domingo agreed to
accept any more refugees. San Domingo agreed to admit 100,000 Jews and that sent
the Zionists into a panic. Their 'logic' being that if countries other than
Palestine could save Jews from Hitler, why bother building up a Jewish state.
Good question, so they set about ensuring that no country would take Jewish refugees!
They call it 'cruel Zionism' because they can be as cruel to Jews as to Arabs
when the mood takes them. And just as in Argentina they didn't want the 'wrong
sort' of Jews, so too in Israel. (Tony Greenstein, writing on his blog, December 10, 2009)
Yosef Grodzinsky, professor of Psychology at Tel Aviv University, and Professor and Canada Research chair
in NeuroLinguistics at McGill University, sheds light on the Zionist preference for 'good human material', in an illuminating interview with
Spannos: Maybe you could begin by summarizing the reasoning underlying the
belief that Zionism and its product—the state of Israel—is the ultimate
manifestation of Jewish identity? Where does this reasoning come from?
Grodzinsky: Zionist discussions of Jewish identity frequently question the
nature of Jewish existence in Diaspora, and its feasibility. Can a Jewish
national identity survive without a designated territory, and independent of
Zionism? Does it require a national language (and if so, should it be Hebrew)?
Must a Jew be religiously Jewish? The Zionist outlook on these questions has
always been crystal clear: Jewish nationalism is Zionism; Hebrew is the national
language, a Jew is a member of the Jewish religion. Fritz (Yitzhak) Baer, doyen
of Jewish history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, helped shape this view,
which was then espoused by the Zionist leadership. In The Galut [State of
Exile], he wrote in the 1930s ... [that] since the Jews manifest a national
unity, even in a higher sense than the other nations, it is necessary that they
return to a state of actual unity. Baer's clear
world view had immense influence on the thinking of leaders and activists,
especially on David Ben-Gurion, prominent leader and Israel's first prime
minister. Interestingly, while these positions date back to the origins of the
Zionist movement, looking at current Zionist thought, it has remained the same.
Spannos: Many Diaspora Jews recognize a radically different view acknowledging a
diversity of outcomes for Jewish identity. Could you elaborate on this view and
Grodzinsky: Diaspora Jews, especially those in the West who had more freedom of
movement than others, tended to acknowledge the multiplicity of future plans for
Jews, which to them legitimized multiple Jewish agendas. I mean, their existence
was the very proof that such agendas were feasible. Salo Baron of Columbia
University, the first professor of Jewish Studies at an American university,
presented a view radically different from Baer's, his contemporary. To Baron,
Jewish ideology and politics correlated with migration patterns and residential
loci, in a way that did not deprive a Jew of a national identity: One essential
symptom of Jewish history, which appears to be of particular significance
nowadays, is that the life of the Jewish people more or less regularly takes
place in worlds set apart from one another. The Baer/Baron debate, then, revolved
around issues of unity versus diversity of
Jewish fates, choices, and identities. Little, if any, residue of this debate
still exists, unfortunately. This is due, in part, to the Holocaust (as will
become clear below), but also thanks to a remarkable propaganda success of the
Zionists, who have made world Jewry align with their view. Question the
singularity of the State of Israel as the ultimate expression of Jewish
nationalism, and you risk being accused of anti-Semitism; do so as a Jew, and
you should expect to be dubbed a self-hater.
Spannos: How did the Holocaust impact this debate?
Grodzinsky: The Holocaust put an end to the intense debate regarding the
relationship between the Jew and the forming Zionist entity. In its shadow, it
has often been said, Jews could no longer be safe anywhere but in Eretz Yisrael,
their homeland. Jews, on this view, should either live in the Jewish national
home in Palestine, or support it vigorously, because it is their fallback
option, should all hell break loose. I have been hearing the rhetoric about
Israel's role as a "safe haven" for Jews in danger since my childhood; rarely
have I heard the opposite position, one that's in fact valid today, to my mind:
that the State of Israel and its actions actually put world Jewry at risk.
Spannos: Zionist organizers frequently used the callous phrase chomer 'enoshi
tov, or "good human material". What does this phrase say about how Zionists
viewed Jews in the Displaced Persons (DP) Camps? Why was this population so
important for the Zionists?
Grodzinsky: We are now moving to my book, whose Hebrew version is titled chomer
'enoshi tov. I was interested in the relationship between Jews and Zionists at
times of crisis, and focused on Jewish survivors in post-war Germany on
Displaced Persons (DP) camps that the US Army and the UN set up after the War,
to assemble and care for millions of civilian victims of the Nazi regime. Jews
were quickly put in separate camps, and became the miserable dwellers of the
Jewish DP camps, the main location of my story. I went there (I mean, to
archival material about these places) in order to see what the Zionists, by now
close to accomplishing their goal and establishing an independent Jewish state,
did to help Jews in need. Jerusalem dispatched hundreds of trained envoys to
post-war Europe. What did they want and do? Their goal was openly stated,
expressed by Ben-Gurion: to populate Palestine with multitudes of Jews.
This translated into a plan to bring all the survivors to Palestine. Hence, survivors seeking Palestine immigration were
dubbed "good material," whereas the others were viewed as weaklings. Here's an
example: "The camps now house just the remainder of She‚erit ha-pleyta [The
Surviving Remnant]. The pioneering human material, that with human, Zionist
awareness, has already left the camps on its way to Palestine through a variety
of routes. What has now remained is that stuff that is glued to the old soil,
like the remains of a meal stuck to the bottom of a burnt pot, which must be
scrubbed and removed. No attempt at convincing them can work: The homeland is on
fire! Could a son not rush to save his home from the fire?
These words reach their ears, but leave
their hearts untouched." I read these documents, much to my amazement, in the
correspondence between envoys in Germany and their Jerusalem leadership, housed
in the Central Zionist Archives. Now, when you read such expressions, you can't
help but be reminded of the objectionable phrase "human dust," used by General
Patton in reference to Holocaust survivors. It was such expressions that gained
him his notoriety as an anti-Semite, and ultimately led him to lose the command
of the US Army in Germany late summer 1945. Zionist envoys, you see, were not
anti-Semitic, of course; nor were they hateful. But as the text shows, their
attitude towards the survivors did not regard their value as human beings who
had just been through horrific suffering, humiliation, exploitation, and loss;
rather, those who could help the Zionist endeavor in Palestine were 'good
material,' whereas others, who sought to rebuild their lives elsewhere, were
Spannos: How did Jews in the DP Camps feel about the creation of a Jewish state?
What kind of discrepancy was there between how they felt and where they actually
migrated over time?
Grodzinsky: The Zionist idea appealed to most Jewish survivors. Taking part in
the Zionist plan was a totally different matter. Much to the chagrin of the
Zionist organizers, the majority of the Jewish DPs were more interested in
immigrating to the United States than to Palestine. America harbored promise,
and thus Jewish survivors flocked to the American Zone of Germany in the
hundreds of thousands, hoping to obtain a U.S. immigration visa. A demographic
survey I conducted indicates that while almost all Jewish DPs said they wished
to go to Palestine, only 40% actually moved to the Jewish state, with the rest
dispersing to all parts of the West. Of these, about 120,000 went to the United
States, once it opened its gates to DP immigration in late 1948.
Spannos: In your book you illustrate how, where there was a conflict between
Zionist interests and the interests of Jews in DP camps, Zionist organizers,
planners and activists put their interests before the well-being of the Jewish
refugees. Let's look at your first illustration, the 1945 children's affair.
What happened to Jewish children in DP camps during 1945?
Grodzinsky: It is important to see the utilitarian logic behind the Zionist
stance: As the ultimate goal was to populate Palestine with multitudes of Jews,
they tried to target weak Jewish populations. Strong communities were less
interested in Palestine immigration: When things are good, as they were in
America (relatively speaking, of course), why move to a war zone? Thus a
decision was made to focus on the Jewish DP camps, and envoys were dispatched to
Germany, driven by Ben-Gurion's vision to bring 250,000 survivors from Germany
to Palestine. If this is the goal, then a Jew heading west is not an asset.
is why the Zionists objected to initiatives aimed at evacuating Jewish child
survivors from Germany right after the war. This is a shocking affair. Several
thousand sick, malnourished, and vulnerable orphans, still at great risk, were
forced by the Zionists to stay in the camps, even though arrangements were made
for them to arrive to safety in England and France. The rest of this tragedy
constitutes chapter 4 of my book.
Spannos: Another illustration of Zionist self-interest over Jewish suffering
post-holocaust is the 1948 compulsory draft of Jews, from DP camps, into the
Israeli Defense Force (IDF). How did Zionists institutionalize forced
conscription in the DP camps?
Grodzinsky: Indeed, the drive to bring Jewish DPs to Palestine reached its peak
in 1948, when the end of the British Mandate over Palestine, and the subsequent
declaration of statehood, led to a full-scale war. Serious manpower shortages
led the Israelis to look for volunteers for the IDF in the DP camps. Survivors
were reluctant: "We have already smelled fire," said many "let others smell it
now." The failure to recruit volunteers led to a forced conscription, officially
enacted on April 11th, 1948. It brought 7,800 new draftees to Palestine, a
significant addition to the fighting army. I recognize that the thought of a
Zionist forced conscription in the U.S. controlled zone of Germany sounds
insane. Yet it actually happened, as massive documentation I discovered in the
Jewish DP archives in New York and Tel Aviv indicates: The American military
government quite generously let the DPs run their camps as almost fully
autonomous localities; Zionist survivors, together with envoys from Palestine,
organized and took control of these camps early on, as I detail in the book.
When the time came, they could exercise this control, sending holocaust
survivors to fight in a land they had never seen, whose language they did not
speak, and most importantly, for a cause they did not necessarily support.
Spannos: I understand that the Zionists at times even resorted to using violent
methods against Jews in DP camps for the purposes of conscription. What did this
Grodzinsky: Yes, violent methods were used when necessary. I was shocked to find
eviction orders issues to draft deserters, fines, other punishments, and in some
instances, even physical beatings. Most important, to my mind, is not the
violence itself but the coercion, And the irony: The very movement that was
created to bring deliverance to the Jews now took possession of Jewish national
identity, and in its name expropriated the rights of the people, so that its own
needs could be served. Thus, while the establishment of the state was predicated
on a conflict with the Arabs over territory, it also led to a conflict with Jews
over people. Much has been written on the former, less on the latter. My book is
an attempt to fill this gap by focusing a critical lens on the actions of the
pre-state Zionist movement. As I was writing it, I tried to give a voice to
simple, ordinary Jews, whose suffering as they were ground by the mills of big
ideas is rarely discussed. I sought to emphasize the fate of regular
individuals, whose life stories form a rich web of alternative Jewish paths.
Spannos: You write that "If we would like to see the gravity of the problem, and
also try to connect it to our present day existence, it is important to
understand what in the eyes of the Zionists legitimized the conscription of Jews
in Europe to the Israeli army." How did they legitimize it and how was it made
possible that it—historically—was able to make sense to them?
Grodzinsky: We can perhaps end this interview where we started: The feeling
among Zionists that they have the fate of all Jews in their possession. As rabbi
Michael Lerner, in his preface to my book, puts it "Zionist arrogance did not
start with the Palestinians." Primo Levi, in his book The Truce tells about a
post-war incident where Zionists hooked up an extra car to a train he was riding
on his long way home from Auschwitz. They were focused, self-assured, confident,
he writes. They did not ask anyone whether they could connect their car to the
train, "they just did it." Many good things happen in this way. But not always.
Regarding Holocaust survivors, the Zionists were focused, clear-headed, with a
coherent plan. That's no small matter. Yet this self-assurance "ever so familiar
to many a reader I'm sure" ‚ has also led to much suffering and destruction.
Israeli Prime Ministers constantly mislead the American public
In her autobiography, Golda Meir paints herself as a "mother" to the Palestinian
people, never mentioning the destruction of their homes and villages. But of
course she knew the terrible truth, having said in a rare moment of clarity:
"It is a dreadful thing to see the dead city. Next to the
port I found children, women, the old, waiting for a way to leave. I entered the
houses, there were houses where the coffee and pita bread were left on the
table, and I could not avoid [thinking] that this, indeed, had been the picture
in many Jewish towns [i.e., in Europe, during World War II]'. (As acting head of
the Jewish Agency Political Department, she had visited Arab Haifa and reported
back to the Jewish Agency Executive on May 6, 1948; from "The birth of the Palestinian
Refuge problem revisited" by Benny Morris, p. 309)
The American public has been deceived, over and over again, by the Prime
Ministers of Israel and other high-ranking Israelis. They tell us they want
"peace" when what they really want is the American money, weapons and influence
that allow them to continue the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, the theft
of their land, and the creation of a fascist state that puts "achievements"
above human happiness.
Jewish hypocrisy mounts to the skies
"What do you gain, Soviet Union, from this miserable
policy? Where is your decency? Would it be a disgrace for you to give up this
battle? (Golda Meir, on the suppression of freedom of Jews in the USSR to the
World Conference on Soviet Jewry, Brussels, published in the New York Times,
But what about the miserable polices of Israel, its lack of decency, and
its disgraceful treatment of Palestinian women and children? Why is the pot
calling the kettle black?
Serfs and slaves always rebel: hence, 9-11
But why are we are seeing the same sort of racism at
work in Israel today that once caused so much suffering for Jewish children during the
Holocaust? According to pro-Israeli propagandists, I should say "Never again!"
to every act of anti-Semitism against Jews, but I should either wink at or turn
my back on acts of Jewish anti-Semitism against Palestinians. (Why?)
" . . . if you follow the polls in Israel for the last 30 or 40 years,
you clearly find a vulgar
includes a third of the population
who openly declare themselves to be racist.
This racism is of the nature of "I hate Arabs" and "I
wish Arabs would be dead".
If you also follow the judicial system in Israel
you will see there is discrimination against Palestinians,
and if you further consider the 1967 occupied territories
you will find there are already two judicial systems in operation
that represent two different approaches to human life:
one for Palestinian life and the other for Jewish life.
Additionally there are two different approaches to property and to land.
Palestinian property is not recognised as private property
because it can be confiscated.
The leaders of Israel and their legions of apologists and propagandists helped bring about 9-11 and two terrible wars,
by constantly demanding that Americans support Israel, when Israel is literally crushing
the life from millions of Palestinians. Have some Muslim men reacted with
violence? Yes, they have. But what would we say about a slave who saw his wife
and children being treated like animals, if he rose up against his "masters"?
Would we be shocked if he resorted to violence? Of course not. And we must
keep in mind that, according to the American Declaration of Independence, it is
not a crime to break an illegal law created by an unjust government; rather,
it is the right and duty of men to rise up and
forcefully overthrow anyone who deprives them of their self-evident rights. George Washington and Thomas
Jefferson were rich aristocrats whose living conditions were far better than
those of most Palestinians today. They claimed the right to rise up and kill
their English overlords, as long as those overlords denied them equal rights and
representative government. So according to the American Founding Fathers, unless Israel grants Palestinians either fully equal rights or
independence, they have the right and duty to rebel.
Israel's racial discrimination is daily life of most Palestinians.
Since Israel is a Jewish state, Israeli Jews are able to accrue special
which non-Jews cannot do.
Palestinian Arabs have no place in a "Jewish" state.
Apartheid is a crime against humanity.
Israel has deprived millions of
Palestinians of their liberty and property.
It has perpetuated a system of gross racial discrimination and inequality.
It has systematically incarcerated and tortured thousands
contrary to the rules of international law.
It has, in particular, waged war against
a civilian population,
in particular children.
The Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto rose up against their Nazi overlords. The Nazis
had created "laws" they expected the Jews to obey, but those laws were racist
and therefore illegal. Americans understand the right of the Jews of the Warsaw
Ghetto to rise up against their Nazi overlords. Americans also understand the
right of black slaves to disobey the racist, illegal "laws" of their white
"masters." Americans also understand that it was the racist, illegal "laws" of
the white settlers that caused Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse to go on the
warpath. Today Americans freely admit that it was Andrew Jackson who was wrong,
and Sitting Bull who was right when he hoped for peace but chose the path of war
when a racist white government proved it didn't want "peace," but to continually
steal land from Indians, by breaking treaty after treaty.
So Americans should be able to understand the predicament of the Palestinians
today, since they are experiencing very similar injustices at the hands of the
governments of Israel and the United States.
American hypocrisy compounds Israeli hypocrisy
In their slavish obedience to Israel's demands for "support,"
Americans have also become raging hypocrites, by claiming rights for themselves
which they deny to Palestinians. What would George Washington & Co. have done,
if they were Palestinians and Americans were trying to dictate their fates from
across a vast ocean? I have no doubt that Washington & Co. would have fired
salvo after salvo at the agents of the distant tyrannical government attempting
to rule them from afar. If we had asked them why they were attacking us, they
would have said, "Because you either have to give us equal rights and
representative government, or you have to grant us independence. Until you do,
you are imperialists and we have the right and duty to kill you."
If we believe our Founding Fathers, and have no wish to be imperialists because
being imperialists brings down the wrath of other people on our hubristic heads,
we need to avoid repeating the mistakes of the British monarchy. And Israel also
needs to stop constantly repeating King George's mistake. King George could have
avoided fighting the Revolutionary War by doing one of two eminently sensible
things: (1) He could have treated the Americans as equals, or (2) he could have
granted them independence.
King George's mistake was electing to employ force because he wanted to impose
his will on people who refused to be his lapdogs. Now Palestinians have informed
Israel and the United States that they are no one's lapdogs. According to our
own Declaration of Independence, we should inform Israel that it's time to make
the Palestinians fully equal citizens, or to grant them their independence. The
only other possibility is war, but why should the United States participate in a
war in which it has nothing to gain and everything to lose?
Washington and Jefferson advised Americans to avoid costly entanglements with
other nations. The costliest entanglement of all time would no doubt be a major
war in the Middle East, since there are 1.5 billion Muslims today and it would
be mind-bogglingly expensive to defeat them. But why should we try? We have
nothing to gain and everything to lose. Is there any doubt what Washington and
Jefferson would advise? Why are we fighting on the side of the imperialists,
against the democrats? It makes no sense.
But then there is no reason for Israel to fight, either. Israel has simply
refused to do what everyone knows must be done. Why? Because it has decided to
steal land it doesn't even need, for ideological (fascist) purposes. But why
should Americans pay for such a program with our money and lives? The cost to
date has been beyond enormous: 9-11, two wars,
multitudes of lives lost, huge sums of money flushed down the drain, with nothing
at all to show for any of it. How did this come about? Let's go back to the origins of
the crisis ...
"There could be no greater calamity
than a permanent discord between us and the Arab people.
Despite the great wrong that has been done us,
we must strive for a just and lasting compromise with the Arab people ...
Let us recall that in former times
no people lived in greater friendship with us
than the ancestors of these Arabs."
The origin of the conflict: Jewish racism against Palestinians
Golda Meir was wrong.
Obviously, there was a Palestinian people, and today there undeniably
still are millions of Palestinians, many of them innocent children living in
very dire straits
inside the walled ghetto of Gaza, under Israeli military occupation in the West
Bank, and in squalid refugee camps scattered across the Middle East (to
understand the horror, younger
readers might conjure up images of the movie District 9). And of
course today almost no one who knows anything about the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict denies that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians lost their land during the Nakba ("Catastrophe") of 1948,
to Jews intent
on creating a Jewish state in Palestine.
"Israel should withdraw from all the areas
which it won from the Arabs in 1967,
and in particular Israel should withdraw completely
from the Golan Heights,
from south Lebanon
and from the West Bank."
But how did it start? How did someone like Golda Meir, a mother as
well as a Prime Minister, come to dehumanize Palestinian
children? Why did she lie, or seem to lie, to the British and American publics? And what was her purpose, since no
sane person lies without a reason? And how is it possible that so many other high-ranking Israeli Jews have said things just as
horrible, and worse? If American politicians utter ethnic slurs, they get
reprimanded or fired. Hell, sportscasters get fired in the United
States for making racist remarks. So how is it possible that Israeli politicians
get away with calling Palestinians "nonexistent," "grasshoppers,"
"cockroaches," etc.? Can the old saw that "where's there smoke, there's fire"
apply in this case? Is Israel is a bastion of racial prejudice,
like Nazi Germany?
Israel must "strive for peace based on justice,
based on withdrawal from all the occupied territories,
and the establishment of a viable Palestinian state
on those territories side by side with Israel,
both with secure borders."
But then why is the government of the United States providing Israel
with hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of financial aid and advanced weapons?
Shouldn't we tell Israeli Jews to act like civilized human beings, if they want our
friendship, support, money, political influence and military hardware?
As Ron Paul has pointed out, Americans are morally responsible for what we do with
our money. We are also morally responsible for what we do with our weapons. If I
give a gun to a known pedophile and he uses it to rape a child, I am at best an
idiot, if not his accomplice. If we give money and weapons to racists intent on inflicting massive suffering on
the people they despise
― millions of them women and children who have never hurt a
fly ― what does that say about us as a nation and as a people?
The study of history can be both fascinating and frightening, especially when we
see history repeating itself in terrible ways. Today we all understand Adolf Hitler's horrendous "final solution" for the
children of Auschwitz: extermination. But have we ever bothered to ask
ourselves about the likely fate of the children of Gaza, unless the world acts
to save them? And how many people are aware
of the many disturbing parallels
between Adolf Hitler and Theodor Herzl, the father of political Zionism and thus
of the modern nation of Israel? Does what Golda Meir said about Palestinian
children ― that they don't exist ― relate to the twisted
"logic" of Hitler and Herzl?
Yes, I believe it does. This letter by Albert Einstein and other Jewish
intellectuals to the New York Times, published on December 4, 1948,
discusses the fascist leanings of the nascent state of Israel. Einstein pointed
out that Menachem Begin, a future prime minister of Israel, was the leader of a
racist, terrorist right-wing organization similar in disturbing ways to the Nazi party:
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence
in the newly created state of Israel of the 'Freedom Party' ... 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 opposed fascism throughout the world, if currently informed as to
Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their names and support
to the movement he represents ... A shocking example was their behavior in the
Arab village of Deir Yassin ... this incident exemplified the character and
actions of the Freedom Party. Within the Jewish community they have preached an
admixture of ultra-nationalism, 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.
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 consideration, 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 of support to Begin. The undersigned therefore take the means publicly
presenting a few salient facts concerning Begin and his party, and of urging all
concerned not to support this latest manifestation of fascism." [pp. 352-353]
A scanned image of this letter is available at
Einstein's support for a
Jewish presence in Palestine clearly did not extend to Jews seizing control of
the region and subduing or displacing Arabs. His dream was
always of a form of Judaism based on the teachings of Hebrew prophets who called
for chesed [mercy, compassion, lovingkindness] and social justice. As he saw the nature of the
Jewish state that emerged, Einstein distanced himself from the racism,
nationalism and militarism which soon became its watchwords.
Einstein considered the message of the prophets to be the living, beating heart
of Judaism, saying: "The Zionist goal gives us an actual opportunity to put into
practice, through a viable solution of the Jewish-Arab problem, those principles
of tolerance and justice that we owe primarily to our prophets. I am convinced
that the living transmission of those principles is the most important thing in
Judaism." He also said: "To be a Jew, after all, means first of all, to
acknowledge and follow in practice those fundamentals in humaneness laid down in
the Bible: fundamentals without which no sound and happy community of men can
He also said: "I
should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of
living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state. Apart from
practical consideration, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists
the ideas of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal
power no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will
sustain, especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own
ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a
Jewish state. We are no longer the Jews of the Maccabee period. A return to a
nation in the political sense of the word would be equivalent to turning away
from the spiritualization of our community which we owe to the genius of our
Voices of Reason: an Eye for an Eyelash?
Before we study the origins of the Jewish anti-Semitism against Arabs, let's
these voices of reason:
Israeli historian, Avi Shlaim, professor of international relations at the
University of Oxford:
"The Biblical injunction of an eye for an eye is savage
enough. But Israel's insane offensive against Gaza seems to follow the logic of
an eye for an eyelash." ("How
Israel brought Gaza to the brink of humanitarian catastrophe," The Guardian,
January 7, 2009)
"It is difficult to see how starving and freezing the
civilians of Gaza could protect the people on the Israeli side of the border.
But even if it did, it would still be immoral, a form of collective punishment
that is strictly forbidden by international humanitarian law." ("How
Israel brought Gaza to the brink of humanitarian catastrophe," The Guardian,
January 7, 2009)
Norwegian doctor Mads Gilbert, one of two foreign doctors working at Gaza's
biggest hospital, al-Shifa, told CBS News: "I've seen one military person among
the hundreds that we have seen and treated. So anyone who tries to portray this
as sort of a 'clean war' against another army are lying. This is an all-out war
against the civilian Palestinian population in Gaza and we can prove that with
the numbers." (CBS News, January 5, 2009)
[I have read a number of reports by Israeli soldiers who said they never saw an
enemy combatant during the invasion of Gaza. If there had been any major
resistance, there would have been large numbers of dead Israeli soldiers. But
there were only 13 Israeli deaths, compared to around 1,400 Palestinian deaths.
More than 300 of the Palestinian dead were children. Once again the numbers
don't lie: it was a massacre.]
Al Haq, a Palestinian legal rights group, reports that 80 per cent of
Palestinian fatalities have been civilians. According to figures cited by the
World Health Organization, at least 40 per cent have been children. (Jonathan
Cook, "Civilian death toll spurs legal action," The National, January
"Even the death toll cited above does little to communicate the true
one-sidedness of the wider violence, injustice and cruelty. One hardly knows
where to begin. For example, largely unmentioned by the media, prior to the
latest invasion, 14 Israelis had been killed by mostly homemade rockets fired
from Gaza over the last seven years as against 5,000 Palestinians killed in
Israeli attacks." (Seumas Milne, "Israel's onslaught on Gaza is a crime that
cannot succeed," The Guardian, December 30, 2008)
[Also, it's important to note that the rocket firings are not entirely without
reason. For more than sixty years Israel has denied Palestinians their
self-evident rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If Israel had
treated American women and children with such disregard, and had inflicted so
much suffering on them, American men would be raining down missiles on Tel Aviv.
So why not be honest, and admit that men of all races and creeds will "fight
fire with fire" when their loved ones are made to suffer unjustly?]
Medicins Sans Frontiers (Doctors Without Borders) characterized the death toll as reaching "alarming
proportions" and indicative of "extreme violence indiscriminately affecting
But don't the Jews own all the land and have the right to impose their will on Palestinians?
In the midst of so much carnage is there any rational, legal or moral basis for
Jews to claim they "own" all the land? Here are comments on the matter by
H. G. Wells, Gandhi, Churchill, FDR, and other luminaries:
"If it is proper to 'reconstitute' a Jewish State which
has not existed for two thousand years, why not go back another thousand years
and reconstitute the Canaanite state? The Canaanites, unlike the Jews, are still
there." (H. G. Wells, quoted by Frank C. Sakran in Palestine Dilemma, p. 204)
"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the
English, or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on
the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral
code of conduct." (Mahatma Gandhi, Tendulkar, Mahatma, Vol. IV, 1938, p. 312)
"The Arabs of Palestine used to have the same rights over Palestinian territory
as the French exercise in France and the English in England. These rights have
been violated without any provocation on their part. There is no evading this
simple fact." (Maxime Rodinson, Israel and the Arabs, 1968)
"We Germans feel that the Palestinian people are entitled to self-determination as much as any other people in the world, as much
as we Germans." (Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, speaking at a press conference in Cairo on December 28, 1977)
"The cause of unrest in Palestine, and the only cause, arises from the Zionist movement, and from our promises and pledges in regard to
it." (Winston Churchill, House of Commons, June 14, 1921)
"A Zionist state in Palestine can only be installed and maintained by force and
we should not be a party to it..."
(President Franklin Roosevelt, 5 March 1945,
of State's Foreign Relations, Volume III)
"Because we took the land this gives us the image of being bad, of being
aggressive. The Jews always considered that the land belonged to them, but in
fact it belonged to the Arabs. I would go further: I would say the original
source of this conflict lies with Israel, with the Jews—and you can quote me." (Yehoshofat Harkabi, former Israeli Chief of Military Intelligence, in
"Peace Won't be a Plane Ticket to Cairo," International Armed Forces Journal,
October 1973, p.30)
"The Palestinians had lived in the country since the dawn of history ...
They are the earliest and the original inhabitants of Palestine. The
Palestinians of today are the descendants of the Canaanites, the Philistines,
and the other early tribes which inhabited the country." (Henry Cattan, Palestine and International Law,
"If the views of the advanced Zionists prevail there is
trouble ahead. Many, very many, intelligent and informed Jews admit this. It is
conceded that the present inhabitants of Palestine have occupied their lands for
centuries; indeed, some of the Syrian communities claim descent from the
Hittites who were in possession at the dawn of history. Be that as it may, all
who know the situation from actual contact and not from propaganda leaflets
admit that these people have dwelt in their present homes for two thousand
years, that the occupancy of the Jews does not go back to immemorial times, and
that their sojourn before the Dispersion was brief. Why should these 'old
settlers' be expelled, they ask, to make room for newcomers?" (Stephen Bonsal,
Suitors and Suppliants at Versailles, p. 45)
"...the initial claim, often submitted by Zionist
representatives, that they have a 'right' to Palestine based on an occupation of
two thousand years ago, can hardly be seriously considered." (Report of the
King-Crane Commission, August, 1919)
"Palestine is not the original home of the Jews. It was
acquired by them after a ruthless conquest, and they have never occupied the
whole of it, which they now openly demand. They have no more valid claim to
Palestine than the descendants of the ancient Romans have to this country. The
Romans occupied Britain as long as the Israelites occupied Palestine, and they
left behind them in this country far more valuable and useful work. "If we are
going to admit claims based on conquest thousands of years ago, the whole world
will have to be turned upside down..." (Lord Sydenham, Hansard, House of
Lords, June 21, 1922)
"I believe it was the intention of the Zionists, right
from the beginning, to dispossess the Palestinians from their homes, and I
believe the British Government was aware of this." (Arnold Toynbee, in the
introduction to an address by Sir John Richmond at a meeting in the House of
Commons, London, May 27, 1971)
"...the extent to which the refugees were savagely
driven out by the Israelis as a part of a deliberate master plan has been
(John H. Davis, Commissioner-General
of UNRWA 1959-63, The Evasive Peace, p. 57)
"Jewish terrorism ... in such savage massacres as Deir
Yassin ... 'encouraged' Arabs to leave
the areas the Jews wished to take over for strategic or demographic reasons.
They tried to make as much of Israel as free of Arabs as possible." (I. F.
Stone, New York Review of Books, August 3, 1967)
"The Jewish combatants there and elsewhere made skillful
use of psychological warfare to break their opponents' morale, and the effect
upon the civilians was only what was to be expected. At a later stage, the
Israeli armed forces did not confine their pressure on the Arab civilian
population to playing upon their fears. They forcibly expelled them: for
example, the population of 'Akka (including refugees from Haifa) in May; the
population of Lydda and Ramleh (including refugees from Jaff) in July; and the
population of Beersheba and Western Galilťe in October." (George Kirk, The
Middle East 1945-50, p. 264)
"The Zionist version of the Palestinian exodus is a myth
manufactured after the cataclysm took place. If the Zionists could show that the
refugees had really fled without cause, at the express instructions of their own
politicians, they would greatly erode the world's sympathy for their plight—and, in consequence, the pressure on themselves to allow them to return. Thus in
public speeches and scholarly-looking pamphlets they peddled this myth the world
over. It was not until 1959 that the Palestinian scholar Walid Khalidi, exposed
it for what it is. His painstaking researches were independently corroborated by
an Irish scholar, Erskine Childers, two years later. Together, they demonstrated
that the myth was not just a gross misrepresentation of accepted or even
plausible facts; the very 'facts' themselves had been invented. Orders for the
evacuation of the civilian population had not simply been issued, the Zionists
said, they had been broadcast over Arab radio stations. One had come from the
Mufti himself. This was the cornerstone of the Zionist case. Yet when these two
scholars took the trouble to examine the record—to go through the specially
opened archives of Arab governments, contemporary Arabic newspapers and the
radio monitoring reports of both the BBC and the CIA—they found that no such
orders had been issued, let alone broadcast, and that when challenged to produce
chapter-and-verse evidence, the date and origin of just one such order, the
Zionists, with all the apparatus of the State of Israel now at their disposal,
were quite unable to do so. They found, on the contrary, that Arab and
Palestinian authorities had repeatedly called on the people to stay put and the
Arab radio services had consistently belittled the true extent of Zionist
atrocities." (David Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch, pp.
But even if Palestinians fled their homes voluntarily, there still was no reason
non-combatants should have been prevented from returning once the hostilities
were over. And there was certainly no "need" for their homes and villages to be
destroyed. It takes a considerable amount of planning and execution
to destroy hundreds of villages, so the best argument that this was the plan is
the fact that it happened.
"It seemed to me to be symptomatic of a certain
blindness to the human reactions of others that so many Israelis professed not
to understand why the Arabs who had been driven from their lands should continue
to hate and try to injure those who had driven them out." (General E.L.M.
Burns, Chief of Staff of UNTSO, Between Arab and Israeli, p. 162)
"It is my considered opinion that the State of Israel is
a racist state in the full meaning of this term: In this state people are
discriminated against, in the most permanent and legal way and in the most
important areas of life, only because of their origin. This racist
discrimination began in Zionism and is carried out today mainly in co-operation
with the institutions of the Zionist movement." (Dr. Israel Shahak, "The Racist
Nature of Zionism and of the Zionist State of Israel", Pi-Ha'aton (the weekly
newspaper of the students of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem), November
"Israel has gradually become a more and more openly
racist country. Anyone not Jewish is at best second-class in Israel."
1974, How Israel Lost Its Soul, Pelican Books, London)
"...Now in the State of Israel, those who are tempted
along the hallucinatory path of power and conquest have to justify their course
by calling on the same devils who, in the Diaspora, were directed against
(Maxim Ghilan, 1974, How Israel Lost Its Soul,
Pelican Books, London)
"—-The State of Israel is presented, both at home and
abroad, as the embodiment of social democracy, a mixture of all that is good in
capitalism and in socialism, the original, the archetypal Welfare State. This
suggestion is, of course, a lie."
(Maxim Ghilan, 1974, How
Israel Lost Its Soul, Pelican Books, London)
"...Israeli society is basically a settlers' society. It
does not primarily concern itself with the "Indians" or "Niggers" of the land.
Its first priority is the creation of a united economic establishment for the
Jewish Israelis. Only then does it concern itself (almost as an afterthought)
with the captive Palestinians."
(Maxim Ghilan, 1974, How
Israel Lost Its Soul, Pelican Books, London)
Whence Such Virulent Racism?
It has been quite some time since the United States had a full-throttle racist
at the helm. Perhaps the last one really bad one was Andrew Jackson, who forced
Native American women and children to walk the Trail of Tears. Before him, there
were any number of Presidents who spoke glowingly of the glories of "equality"
and "democracy" while owning slaves themselves, including Thomas Jefferson, the
coiner of the ringing phrase, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all
men are created equal" and the father of our country, George Washington. But
truth be told, Washington and Jefferson considered themselves to be "more equal"
than blacks and Native Americans. Jefferson raised his children by Sally
Hemmings as slaves in his own (admittedly very expensive) home, and once had a
slave whipped for stealing nails, while a sermon on Christian ethics was read to
him. If the irony of that escapes you, God help you, but hopefully it didn't.
My point is simple and hopefully obvious by now: the hypocrisy of people like
Washington, Jefferson and Golda Meir can result in devastating suffering for
innocent children. Fortunately for the United States, it's been awhile since we
had a Grand Wizard of the KKK running the show. Unfortunately for the children
of Gaza, Israel has had nothing but Grand Wizards of the KKK running the show.
As you read this page, please keep in mind that I am an editor and publisher of
Holocaust poetry ― not a racist and certainly not an
anti-Semite. I am for the Jewish people, not against them. But to not
be a racist, I must also be for the Palestinian people, most of whom
are Semites. If I oppose what Nazi Germany did to the Jews during the Shoah
(Hebrew for "Catastrophe"), then I must also oppose Zionism when it inflicts
similar suffering on Palestinians, at it has during the Nakba (Arabic for
"Catastrophe"). If I criticize Nazi Germany, that doesn't make me anti-German.
If I criticize my own government, as I often do, that doesn't make me
anti-American. And if I criticize the government of Israel for allowing Jewish
racists to abuse and humiliate Palestinian children on a daily basis, the same
way an American "democracy" once allowed white racists to abuse and humiliate
black children on a daily basis, that certainly doesn't make me an anti-Semite.
In all three cases, my criticism is aimed at the policies and actions of
governments and individuals fully capable of changing their boorish, brutal,
reprehensible behavior. It is not "wrong" to criticize brutes and boors,
and it is not "unfair" to suggest that Israel needs to do what the United States
did, when it finally abandoned Jim Crow laws and kangaroo courts during the days
of the American Civil Rights Movement.
And please keep in mind that I am not opposed to the dream of Zionism. If any
family or extended family wants to live together in peace and security, I can
certainly understand and sympathize, because I feel the same way about my
family. But I understand that if I want my family to live together in peace and
security, we can't steal my neighbors' land and abuse their children, or we'll
have a war on our hands. This is, of course, the dilemma Israeli Jews face
today, because the government of Israel keeps stealing Palestinian land and
allowing the abuse of Palestinian children. To their eternal shame, many Jews
and Christians use the Bible to excuse the inexcusable, while turning blind eyes
and deaf ears to the cries of multitudes of innocent women and children. Of
course German Christians once sat in the pews of their tidy, white-washed
churches and sang hymns of praise to God and Jesus, while Jewish children
suffered unimaginable torments and despair just a few yards away. And of course
white American Christians once sat in the pews of their tidy, white-washed
churches and sang hymns of praise to God and Jesus, while black children
suffered and died in slave hovels and Native American children walked the Trail
of Tears. Was it really the "divine plan" for Christians to live out their
"manifest destiny" at the expense of the people of other races and creeds? One
would hope Jesus had higher standards. But then why do American Christians
insist that it is the "manifest destiny" of Jews to trample Palestinian children
underfoot, when there is plenty of land for everyone, if only Israeli Jews would
learn to share and share alike? Much of the land Israel stole from Palestinians
in 1948 lies fallow to this day, inside the borders of Israel, because most
Israeli Jews prefer to live in urban areas. Obviously, it makes no sense to
steal land one doesn't even need, from children who are perishing and their
families, especially when in so doing one brings the world to the brink of World
How can such incomprehensible things happen, in the modern world?
I hope you will bear with me for a few minutes, because I believe I can make a
strong case that the children of Gaza face the same ominous demon that the
children of Auschwitz once faced: a virulent, fanatical, unreasoning strain of
anti-Semitism. But I think I can also make a strong case for what the world
clearly needs to do, to save the children of Gaza. The solution is simpler than almost
anyone believes, although "simple" does not mean "easy." I will quickly
summarize my main points, then provide a wealth of facts to back up my main
assertions. Most of these facts will come in the form of direct quotations from
the diaries and other writings of the leading Zionists: Theodor Herzl, Chaim
Weizmann, David Ben-Gurion, Moshe Dayan, Menachem Begin, et al. As with Hitler,
these men's words both reveal and betray them. They repeatedly, often
arrogantly, announced what they were doing, and why, in no uncertain terms. If
you take the time to read this page in its entirety, I believe you may agree
that I have a strong case when I say that:
(1) Adolf Hitler and Theodor Herzl began with the same "solution" to the "Jewish
(2) Like Hitler, Herzl, the founder of political Zionism and the modern state of
Israel, was an anti-Semite
(3) The founders of the modern state of Israel practiced anti-Semitism,
directed at Palestinians
(4) The early Zionists did not merely seek a safe haven for Jews, but to
ethnically cleanse Palestine of Arabs
(5) This plan was in place and being implemented long before the Holocaust
(6) The Palestinians understood what the Zionists intended and had every right
(7) The solution today is for Israel to establish equal human rights, fair laws
and fair courts for everyone
(8) This can be accomplished via a new UN resolution based on the American
Creed, backed by economic sanctions (which will probably not be necessary once
the government of Israel sees the "handwriting on the wall")
Please keep in mind that I am offering facts and arguments for a specific
purpose, which is peace and the protection of
innocent women and children on both sides of the conflict, including the
children of Gaza but also Israeli and American children. Why I say this will
become clear, if you continue to read.
While at times I may seem to be "against" Israel, it is not my goal to attack or harm
anyone, but only to help make peace possible. I simply believe that it is necessary at this
time for Israeli Jews, American Jews and other Americans to admit what really
happened to the Palestinians, confess that what happened cannot be justified, then do what must be done to establish peace through justice, in the
form of equal rights, fair laws and fair courts for everyone in the
excuses or exceptions. White Americans once did very similar things to African Americans and
Native Americans. But today most white Americans freely admit that what happened in
the past was wrong, and we don't continue to treat blacks and Indians as
"inferior beings" or third-class citizens. If we can't or won't correct all the
injustices of the past, we can at the very least stop heaping new injustices on
the heads of innocent women and children. The first step is to stop
trying to justify the unjustifiable and excuse the inexcusable. The next step is
to immediately and unconditionally grant Palestinians equal rights and the protections
of fair laws and courts. This is only just, and history has proven that fair
laws and courts can lead to racial peace, even in the wake of the most terrible
atrocities. Soon after post-WWII Germany established fair laws and courts, Jews
were able to live in relative peace there, despite the recent and still-fresh horrors of the
Holocaust. Soon after the United States finally granted minorities the
protections of fair laws and courts, the grandchildren of black slaves were able to attend
integrated schools, and today we have a black president, black
senators, black judges and black generals. The myth of white "superiority" was
always a myth; so too is the myth of Jewish "superiority" to Palestinians.
If we want to avoid World War III, we need to learn the hard lessons of the
Holocaust and say "Never again!" to such things happening to other people's
children, or there will inevitably be hell to pay.
Herzl, Hitler and the terrible implications of Jewish anti-Semitism for the children of
Was Theodor Herzl an anti-Semite who, like
Adolf Hitler, directed intense self-loathing at people who looked like him:
short, dark, non-Aryan? Is the modern state of Israel
running on the same sort of high-octane anti-Semitic racism that fueled the
boilers of Nazi Germany? If so, what does this mean for the children of Gaza and
for the Palestinians as a people, since they are not
Aryan in appearance?
What sort of world do we inhabit, if 65 years after the end of the Holocaust the
children of Gaza must live in abject misery and peril of their lives because
they "look wrong"? Why have rich, powerful Jewish Overlords herded them into giant
holding pens to keep them from "getting out of line," when they haven't done
anything to harm anyone? This was the modus operandi of the Nazis: to
collectively punish all Jews for the crimes of a few. But if it was wrong for
Hitler's disciples to herd innocent Jewish children into giant corrals, how
can it be right for Herzl's disciples to do the same thing to innocent
The parallels are indeed fascinating, frightening and disturbing ... especially
when we consider that another event like 9-11 or even World War III could be
triggered by Israel's horrendous treatment of the Palestinians. What if a
plague breaks out in Gaza and the Muslim world blames Israel and the United
States for the deaths of multitudes of innocents? World War III might be the
result. So it is not only wrong for
Israel to deny Palestinians human rights and freedom, but it is very dangerous
for Israeli and American children as well, because once people have been
stripped of their ability to care for themselves, whatever happens to them
becomes the responsibility of the people in power. If a Jewish
child died due to poor medical care in a Nazi concentration camp, who was responsible: the child, his parents, or
the Nazis? The answer is obvious. But then who is responsible for the deaths of
Palestinians who die in the shadows of Israel's so-called
"security walls" because ambulances were help up at the gates? Who built the walls? Israel. Who supplied hundreds of
billions of dollars in financial aid and advanced weapons to Israel, without
ever requiring an accounting of how the money was spent or how the weapons
were used? The United States. While Israeli Jews and American
Christians constantly harp on "Islamic terrorism," in reality the governments of
Israel and the United States have inflicted far more terror on far more people
over a much longer period of time. If we want to avoid another 9-11, World War
III and a nuclear Armageddon, it's past time to confront the truth and
stop harming other men's women and children and causing them to die prematurely,
because to cause the premature death of an innocent person is murder.
If my child needs a doctor and you deliberately keep my child's ambulance from
reaching a hospital, and my child dies, what does that make you, and how should
you expect me to feel about you? If we want peace with the Muslim world, we must
understand that we cannot afford to give money and weapons to anyone who chooses
to deny Muslim children the things we cherish for our own children: life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness (or, at the very least, not living in
abject misery for the sake of robber barons).
Herzl and Hitler: twin sons of different mothers?
Please click this link to read about the disturbing similarities between Herzl
and Hitler and to hear the equally disturbing
Zionist Quotations of men such as
Herzl, Jabotinsky, Netanyahu, Weizmann, Sharon, Barak, Weitz, Ben-Gurion,
Sharett, Dayan, Rabin and Begin.