Understanding the Isaeli/Palestinian Conflict - The Roots of Zionism

In order to truly understand the strife occurring in Israel, formerly known as Palestine, one must understand the political ideology that led to the birth of the Jewish State known today as Israel. I have received countless U2Us requesting that I put together a thread that factually dicsusses the history of Zionism, its roots and purposes and its evolution leading to the establishment of a Jewish State. Let me be VERY clear on the matter - I am NOT a racist, a bigot, an anti-semite or hatemonger. I have no "agenda" other than to discuss the facts as they exist. Our schools and media have done a very poor job on educating people on the facts. The results of this propaganda and grandstanding have lead to incoherent discussions regarding the issues. Let us begin...

Up until the mid 1880s most European Jewish Scholars agreed that the solution to anti-semitism was the full assimilation of Jews into the various countries where they resided. However, around 1882 Leon Pinsker penned the tome "Self-Determination" and presented the idea of a Jewish Nation-State, preferably on the lands occupied by the Palestinians. This work was oft disregarded as fantasy and widely scoffed at by Jewish Scholars of the day - until Theodore Heizl authored "The Jewsih State" in 1896.

Heizl took Pinsker's musings on a Jewish State to a new level, claiming that the Jews had a "Divine Right" to the lands presently occupied by the Palestinians citing their Jewish occupation during Old Testament times. This gave momentum to the political movement known as Zionism - driven by the idea that the Jewish peoples have a divine right to the Palestinian lands.

In 1896 Heizl became the President of the Zionist World Congress, the first group of its kind to lobby for their end-game - the creation of the nation of Israel. Shortly after his appointment he approached the Sultan of Turkey and proposed Palestine as a place for Jewsih settlement and the establishment of their own nation. His request was rejected on the grounds that Arabs had occupied the land for centuries and the Jews had no legitimate claim to the land. Next he approached Britain who, in turn, offered Uganda as the location for a Jewish state. This offer was refused by the Zionist World Congress as their eye was on Palestine.

During that same time, part of the political playbook of the ZWC (Zionist World Congress) was to settle the lands of Palestine by stealth. This gave birth to 20,000 Jews settling Palestine during the 1890s in a movement known as the First Aliya ("Ascent"). The Second Aliya began a few years later after the failed Russion Revolution of 1905 where tens of thousands more Jews moved to Palestine and settled the land.

Almost a decade later, future Israeli President, Chaim Weizmann, declared at a Zionist meeting in London regarding Palestine that it is "A country without a people for a people without a country." This statement completely ignored the fact that the land of Palestine had been occupied for centuries by Arabs. Through continued lobbying efforts on behalf of the ZWC Weizmann became responsible for the British Government's Balfour Declaration stating, "His majesty's government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people... it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done that may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine."

Read that declaration carefully... the Crown fully supported the creation of a Jewish nation in Palestine, HOWEVER, it was NOT to interfere with the rights of the existing non-Jewish population. In essence, they were to co-exist in harmany with one another. However, it was this declaration that laid the foundation for the problems that have escalated since.

Following WWI, President Woodrow Wilson commissioned the King-Crane Commission to study and understand the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. The commission concluded that over 90% of the land was occupied by non-Jewish Arabs who vehemently opposed the establishment of a Jewish state on their lands. The commission further concluded that if the Zionist were permitted occupancy of Palestine "Zionists looked forward to a practically complete disposession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants... not can the errection of such a Jewish State be accomplished without the gravest trespass upon the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.

Again, reviewing the Belfour Declaration and the results of the King-Crane Commission one could eaily and reasonably assume that the creation of the Jewish State could not proceed as ordered by the Crown as it clearly jeopardized the very rights of the existing non-Jewish comminities. The King-Crane Commission also concluded, "No British officer consulted by the commission believed that the Zionist program could be carried out except by force of arms." Finally, the commission concluded, "The initial claim, often submitted by the Zionist representatives, that they have a 'right' to Palestine, based on an occupation of 2thousand yearsago, can hardly be seriously considered."

As anyone can plainly see, the pitfalls and problems of the establishment of Jewsih State on Palestinian lands had been thoroughly vetted and concluded to be a non-starter by the US Government. That, however, was not sufficient to prevent the League of Nations from declaring the Palestine become a British "Mandate" in 1920. The result of that announcement led to a massive uprising in Palestine leading to vioent anti-Zionist riots claiming the lives of over 50 Jewish settlers.

The British established a commission to investigate the violence, concluding that the riots were a result of Arab disappointment in broken promises of independence, made in 1915, and that they feared economic and political subjugation to the Zionists. Again, providing plenty of warning regarding the grave dangers of the establishment of a Jewish State on Palestine.

Yet, despite the amassing body of evidence that exhibited the inherent dangers of the Zionist Plan, they persisted in their efforts to settle Palestine and claim it as their own. Regarding the stealth plan, Arthur Ruppin spoke very clearly of the Zionist agenda to carry out its plan of occupation stating, "Land is the most necessary thing for establishing our roots in Palestine. Since there are hardly any more arable unsettled lands in Palestine, we are bound in each case of the purchase of land and its settlement to remove the peasants who cultivated the land."

As Arab awareness of the stealth settlement plan became more evident sentiments turned against selling their land to immigrant Jews. It was at this same time that Hitler's rise to power in Germany led over 130,000 Jews to flee persecution, between 1933 and 1935, and settle in Palestine. This only continued to agitate the occupying Arabs as they witnessed increasing settlements spread throughout Palestine.

In 1938, Zionist spokesman David Ben Gurion laid out the plans of the Zionist in clear detail stating, "In our political argument abroad, we minimize Arab opposition to us, but let us not ignore the thruth among ourselves. We are the aggressors and they defend themselves." It was evidently clear to anyone receiving the message that teh Zionist were determined to take Palestine as jewish state by force, if necessary.

Around that same time, another future leader of Israel, Manachem Begin, spoke with equal candor on the matter, "If this is Palestine and not the land of Israel, then you are invaders. If this is Palestine, then it belongs to a people who lived here before you came."

The Zionist refused to cede their plan and instituted what was known as the IRGUN Paramilitary group whose sole mission was to wreak terror on the Arab inhabitants of Palestine. In July of 1938 the IRGUN began their wave of terror by deonating numerous bombs throughout Palestine killing 76 Arabs. The British, realizing that things were getting out of hand, captured and jailed an IRGUN leader. This arrest led to the IRGUNs slaughter of 52 more Arabs. The group claimed that it would continue it's reign of terror until its leader was released. In an attempt to stem the growing tide of violence and discontent, the British authorities limited the number of Jewish immigrants to Palestine at 15,000 per year. This led to yet another wave of terrorist attacks by the Zionist IRGUNs killing 27 more Arabs.

By the conclusion of WWII, the wave of terror instituted by the Zionist had spread beyond Arabs to the killing of British officials and nationals. On of the most famous casualties of this increased effort to foment terror was Count Folke Bernadotte, the head of the Swedish Red Cross who helped to save thousands of Jews from Nazi run concentration camps. He was appointed as mediator between the Palestinians Arabs and the Jews in May of 1948. Less than 4 months later he was assasinated on direct orders from future Israeli statesman, Yitzhak Shamir, head of the zionist terrorist organization known as the Stern Gang.

The Zionist clearly held the cards as terrorist attacks were stepped up throughout Palestine by several reigning Zionist factions. One such event occurred in April 1948 in Deir Yassin where over 250 Arabs were rounded up and slaughtered. IRGUN commanders issued orders to their assasins throughout the region, "As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere." That saw the first Israelli President, Chaim Weizmann make the claim regarding the massacres, calling them "A miraculous clearing of the land."

So it goes... the beginning of Zionism and terrorism in the region. It was NOT first perpetrated by the Muslims, but against them. In order to have any understanding regarding the complexities of today's Israel, one must first seek the truth regarding the past for it most certainly guides our future.

This analysis is biased. I see nothing in it about actions and inactions, lack of cooperation, and violence committed by the Arabs at the same time you produce a list of ONLY Jewish wrongs.

You state we need to look at the facts in order to understand where we are and how we got here, but you conveniently stacked the deck on what you have proffered as some offering for those eager to understand.

Why is that?

I should also add, that following the estblishment of the nation of Israel, the IRGUNs became the pretense for the modern Mossad - continuing their ruthless campaign against the occupying Arabs of Palestine, now recognized as the modern state of Israel.

This history is important as it created the foundation of the current struggles between these groups of people. I'm interested in hearing feedback on this analysis, thanks.

reply to post by Valhall


Negative. I've done no such thing. The purpose of this thread is not to discuss today's transgressions, but to understand the foundation of today's transgressions.

There is no "innocent" party of today. Both sides have engaged in abhorrent acts against the other which continue daily. Again, one must understand the foundation in order to better understand the "Why" behind the modern campaigns of terror being waged on both sides.

Valhall, please feel free to fill in the blanks regarding the historic transgression perpetrated by the occupying Arabs. This is meant to be a discussion.

Okay. If you don't mind, I'll bump my articles on this historical analysis...just as a complimentary read to your work.

I'm not trying to bash you. You have put in a good deal of work. And I appreciate you sharing your work with others. It's just that in working on this topic a few years back, I know there's more to be told about the historical events than what is included in this first write up of yours.

I'll bump my articles. Thanks.

I bumped all 10 parts, but the first 5 center on the Israeli/Palestinian issues.

Originally posted by Valhall
This analysis is biased. I see nothing in it about actions and inactions, lack of cooperation, and violence committed by the Arabs at the same time you produce a list of ONLY Jewish wrongs.

You state we need to look at the facts in order to understand where we are and how we got here, but you conveniently stacked the deck on what you have proffered as some offering for those eager to understand.

Why is that?

So Valhall, instead of marking it biased why don't you debate his assertions?

It kills me how pro-israelis ignore truth with obfuscation. You don't see anything wrong with the way Israel acquired their land? then there is no argument. You are the one who is Biased.

Look forward to hearing responses to actually claims.

Great thread and well laid out. However, you didn't mention much about the whole "Lawernce of Arabia" pact which the british recanted. For those that don't know, the British promised that land/independence to Palestinian if they helped fight the ottoman empire, which they did and succeeded.

But then they gave the land to their enemy. Yeah, no reason to be mad.

AAC

hey, absolute,

I have bumped a 10 article series on this topic as a measure of supplementing his work. That's the proper thing to do in this instance. That constitutes my "debate" of his write up. I'm not saying that the historical facts he conveyed are WRONG...I'm saying they are incomplete.

And don't call me names or make any assumptions about me until you've taken the time to keep up with the discussion.

reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation


Ah yes, very good point. I hadn't the time to discuss in detail the promises mad to the Arabs of Palestine by the British Crown. They are, however, germaine to the understanding of why they were so embittered when the State of Israel was officially recognized. I will attempt to provide additional details on that as this thread evolves.

reply to post by Valhall



You claimed him to be biased when it was his perspective describing the origin of Israel. If you have something else to say add it, not belittle his effort.




AAC


[edit on 4-1-2009 by AnAbsoluteCreation]

Originally posted by kozmo
reply to post by Valhall

 

Negative. I've done no such thing. The purpose of this thread is not to discuss today's transgressions, but to understand the foundation of today's transgressions.

There is no "innocent" party of today. Both sides have engaged in abhorrent acts against the other which continue daily. Again, one must understand the foundation in order to better understand the "Why" behind the modern campaigns of terror being waged on both sides.

Valhall, please feel free to fill in the blanks regarding the historic transgression perpetrated by the occupying Arabs. This is meant to be a discussion.

this war will not end...both sides teach their children to fear and hate through the eyes of the parents history. children are not born with political or vengeful hatred...it is taught by the parents. until this ends...there will be continual death on both sides.

What are you blind?

I have had something else to say. Can you not find what I've had to say?

Is it too difficult for you to find the threads on the front page?

Here...let me hold your hand a minute.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You're continuing to state false accusations against me. I have requested you stop that.

I have not belittled kozmo. I asked why the write up was only centered on the Jewish side of the historical record. It doesn't matter what the answer to that is anymore, as I feel I've taken adequate steps to present additional information now.

I'm trusting because my information is in text versus youtube, you'll still be able to spend a few minutes on it.

Ok, EASY EVERYONE!!! This is a touchy topic, to be sure. In fairness to Valhall, he has not belittled me or challenged the validity of my assertions, he simply has counterpoints that he would like to add. I am in favor and will read your thread Val, when time permits.

Again, the purpose of this thread is to better understand what Zionism is and how it led to the formation fo the nation of israel. I am certainly open to any counterpoints or the addition of ommisions that anyone feels germaine to the thread. Thanks.

Originally posted by Valhall
This analysis is biased.

Nope. I got 20/20.

And this is what my perfect vision saw first (which is what I replied to). So you're saying I have to track down all of your threads to see your pov? Sorry, you're not that important.

Thanks for posting the threads, I will peruse.

But i do believe you created this misunderstanding by expecting me to extrapolate your meaning when it wasn't even apparent in your original reply.

AAC

KOSMO you put together a good piece of work telling us your perspective on this situation and the facts as you see them. I appreciate your effort. It belongs in one of those debate/fight threads.

As Valhall said though - there is more to the story.

Even though the Jewish state has made errors, so have the 'palestinians' and their muslim neighbors.

Originally posted by Valhall

EDITED .. nevermind .. You posted the links as I was asking for them.

The bottom line is that Israel is a soverign country. It has been for many years now. The 'palestinians' need to deal with that fact in a mature manner. Move on. Holding a grudge isn't going to get anyone anything. I understand that they have been used and abused by many different groups, even by Hamas itself. (and Especially by Arafat.) But they are going to have to accept Israel and move on to one of the many, many, Muslim homelands that are available and leave the Jews to their own little homeland - the only Jewish homeland on the planet.




[edit on 1/4/2009 by FlyersFan]

[edit on 1/4/2009 by FlyersFan]

If you read this

"This analysis is biased."

as this


"This analysis is biased."

Then you read it correctly. I don't believe kozmo had some dastardly ulterior motive to the way he wrote things up. His subsequent posts show he was intentionally centering on the creation and progression of Zionism as part of the current problem. That's fine. But I feel behooved to include more just to make sure the reader knows there actually is two sides to the story.

To be clear on my position after the research I did on this topic several years back, I feel EVERYONE is to blame. The Jews, the Arabs, Britain, France, the U.S., Russia, the League of Nations and the UN. The situation in the mideast has been a world-wide creation.

the need to harm and kill each other, far outweighs any idea of a peaceful solution. this type of thinking has been around for too long to stop.

so the only solution seems to be that they need to kill as many of their enemies, until the only people left on both sides decide they do NOT want to do it any more

Originally posted by jimmyx

so the only solution seems to be that they need to kill as many of their enemies, until the only people left on both sides decide they do NOT want to do it any more

At times it truly feels like this will be the only solution. When the fanatics and militants of both sides have so utterly destroyed the populations to the point they are left with the ones who never gave a care in the first place, maybe they will find peace.



[edit on 1-4-2009 by Valhall]

Heres an interesting look at the entire region and talks of the beliefs of each Palestine and Israel. There is reference to the bible but it doesnt seem to bias the article as a whole .

www.gnmagazine.org...

Originally posted by jimmyx
so the only solution seems to be that they need to kill as many of their enemies, until the only people left on both sides decide they do NOT want to do it any more

Actually I agree with this - pretty much. Let them all pound the snot out of each other until no one is left that wants to fight. Then the world can move on and not have to hear about this day after freak'n day.

Just let them have at it - with the world stepping aside and not interfering.