|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Social Networking Newbies Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | Israel - Gaza - Some History | Views: 758 | | Jan 09, 2009 3:20 am | | Israel - Gaza - Some History | # | 
John Stephen Veitch | | In the last two weeks I've read perhaps 300 pages on this topic. I did get interested in it 3-4 years back, but I really struggled to understand it then. I think my present view is more soundly based.
There has been a very heated debate on another Ryze board. We seem to now agree that the present attack on Gaza is illegal, that the attack was planned months ago and the breakdown of the "truce" and the rockets being fired into Gaza is an excuse for the attack and not a reason.
In fact Israel broke the truce by killing 6 Palestinians on 4th November. Hamas did respond with rocket fire, but 12 hours later. Hamas offered Israel a TEN YEAR truce in return for open borders into Gaza so that normal business trade could occur. This was rejected by Israel.
The real reason for the present Israeli attack is still to be revealed, but I suspect it's the growing popularity of Hamas in Gaza and on the West Bank. Hamas has brought an improvement in government, but even more importantly it's given the people of Gaza HOPE.
Hamas has three demands: on the face of it very reasonable demands.
1) Return to the borders of 1967 as required by UN rulings.
2) The end of settlement development as also required by the UN.
3) The right of return for the Palestinian People.
These are called the non-negotiable Rights of Palestinians. You can see why this is a popular ideal for the people in Gaza. Perhaps you can also see that if that idea gets too much momentum the plans of certain Zionist elements in the Israeli government might be cancelled.
Israel's propaganda war is based on untruth. When you understand the history that's more obvious.
You will also see that Hamas's third demand, "the right of return" isn't so innocent, in fact that's all that's required in a democratic world to destroy Israel. So since Hamas will have to forgo one of it's "rights", the question is how should the Palestinians be compensated?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
There are two people in the other debate who don't agree with the above assessment. One who says, that Israeli's always lived in Israel and that the land was empty, and that evidence that God intended the land to belong to Israel in in the repeated success of her armed forces.
The other one argues that Palestinians should stop complaining about being evicted from their land. In his view eviction is common in history, and has happened and is happening today in every country. His view is "get over it."
So that's where I begin.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Land confiscation for any "reason" is always controversial, unless of course it's the land of the Indigenous People. In that case it's "desirable development" as my own father used to say.
Two NZ examples:
During WWII a large block of Maori Land, (Belonging to a tribe but "not used") was taken over for the building of a proposed airport. This was at the time part of the war effort. Everybody was "giving" to the war effort, and no questions were asked about the "rights" of the land owners, as they "gave" their property to the crown.
50 years later that land became one of the best golf courses in the country and suburban housing. Was this fair? Here in NZ, under the Treaty of Waitangi the court decided that it was not fair, and required the government to compensate the tribe for it's losses.
A large amount of the electricity generated in NZ comes from Hydro electric dams. Under the Public Works Act, the government can require that land be sold to the government for projects like roads, irrigation, airports, and dams. Half the township of Cromwell, was to be flooded when the Clyde Dam was built. The planning began 20 years earlier.
Property owners were notified that their land might be flooded many years before the scheme was finally approved and before any ground work was done. This immediately begins to affect property values. Compensation is payable at "market rates". In the case of Cromwell the business district was to be relocated. Existing businesses were given first choice of sites in the new business district. The point is, Reg, that although people complain bitterly about the long drawn out process, and plead that the compensation is inadequate, there is an active attempt to consult and to be open with people, and pretty much fair values are realised.
I hope something as good functions where you are.
What happened with the creation of Israel, is more like the first case I mentioned. A group who considered themselves to have sufficient "authority" chose to change the map in an area of the Middle East where Britain was the controlling authority.
Some people in Israel try to argue that there was nothing and nobody there. People said the same thing when they took that Maori Land I spoke of. My father was of the view that all Maori Land should be confiscated and sold to farmers who would make it productive. If you go back to the 1940's those attitudes existed.
A long lecture on the history of the transfer of people is here.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7854/transferlecture.html
Rabbi Dr. Chaim Simons, in a lecture on Wednesday, 6 June 1990, gives a clear history of the knowledge of Arab title to land where the new nation of Israel was to be established. It's a very long article, but well constructed and quite readable if you print it out.
The article makes it absolutely CLEAR, that Arabs were to be expelled from the land. For the most part there was no consideration that they should be compensated for their losses, although if they would go willingly, some help in resettlement was offered. In my view Arabs were given a value like slaves or cattle, not only by Zionists, but also by people who had won the Nobel Peace Prize, and an American President. The lives of poor people or of people from "other" cultures were not respected as "equal".
So at the time, it wasn't only Zionists who were blind to the injustice of what was planned. Rather, they acknowledged the injustice of what they planned but decided (like Madeline Albright) that "it's worth the cost". At the time the expulsion of the Arabs was considered not only "legal" but desirable, and for many people even "essential". So for heavens sake, let's stop pretending that the creation of Israel wasn't unjust to Arabs. They got a raw deal. Today we'd call that a crime, an abuse of human rights, but it's not fair to impose today's understanding of what a crime is, to what happened 70 years ago.
I can give you a NZ example where troops confiscated the best agricultural land in the Waikato (1860's) because the rebellious Maori's refused to sell it. When the surveyors and the road makers arrived, Maori responded with a sit in. As a result their village was burned, their men arrested and imprisoned (many of them died in captivity in the South Island). This was "legal" according to the government of the time.
There was a clear intention to "DRIVE the ARABS out of Israel". As indicated by these statements.
Question no. 1: We must expel Arabs and take their place.
Question no. 2: The Jews ... will help in getting Arabs out of Galilee.
Question no. 3: Palestine should be for the Jews and no Arabs should be in it.
Question no. 4: Western Palestine should be handed over completely to the Jews, clear of Arab population.
So there is an irony in the demand that Hamas should recognise Israel's "right to exist". No such right was offered to the Arabs.
Discussion of the Jewish Agency in the late 1930's:
"The transfer of the Arab population in large numbers is therefore a pre-condition for the establishment of the State."
What should be the destination for the Arab transferees? In answer, a number of the members stated: "We must strive to transfer the Arabs as far as possible from our borders, if possible to Iraq."
The American involvement in the transfer of Arabs was open.
"Another important personage who was proposing transfer at this period was the President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In early 1939, Roosevelt proposed the transfer of hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Palestine to Iraq. This was to be financed jointly by the U.S., Britain and the Jews.
A few years later, Roosevelt told his Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgenthau: "I would begin to move the Arabs out of Palestine.... Each time we move out an Arab we would bring in another Jewish family.... There are lots of places to which you could move the Arabs. All you have to do is drill a well because there is a large underground water supply, and we can move the Arabs to places where they can really live."
It's about here, as I read the history, that things began to go wrong from the point of view of the many of the international community who had supported the plan up to now. Of course from the Zionist point of view this is apparently the place where things began to go right.
"In the months immediately preceding and following the establishment of the State of Israel, there was a mass exodus of Arabs. The official explanation of the Israeli government was that this was as a result of the Arab leaders who told them to leave. Recently however, with the opening of classified documents, a different picture emerges. Although a number did leave of their own freewill, others were expelled on the orders of Ben-Gurion.
So long as the British ruled Eretz-Israel, Ben-Gurion could only talk about transfer - he could not act. In May 1948, the British left the country, and Ben-Gurion was made Prime Minister.
Following the capture of Nazareth, the Prime Minister visited the city. On seeing so many Arabs, he asked: "Why are there so many Arabs? Why didn't you expel them?"
"... Ben-Gurion met with his army chiefs to plan the capture of these cities. The Commander of the Palmach, Yigal Allon, asked Ben-Gurion, "What shall we do with the Arabs?" Ben-Gurion retorted, "Expel them". This was immediately communicated to the Army Headquarters and the expulsion implemented."
There's no need to make an excuse for what happened. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs were forcibly EXPELLED from what we now call Israel. I'm not going to argue about the legality of what finally happened. Whatever the facts about that, it was certainly UNJUST.
We don't need to pretend that what happened in history is other than what it is. You can see the practical result on the ground, and in the death toll.
The question is: What do we do now?
That's also involved with a decision each of us has to make about "who am I", none of us need to justify what happened. All the propaganda and bullshit being spread around simply makes life more difficult. A lie told often enough will never become "truth".
We can all get caught still believing some propaganda story from our childhood, long after it's passed it's "use by date". If this applies to you, and you can remember it was just propaganda, I promise the world won't end, and Israel will still exist, and your own life will go on with one problem less you need to deal with. Join the modern world.
History is DONE. Understanding history is important, because a correct understanding allows us to more forward TODAY in a sensible way.
The injustice to the Arab people is compounded today because they still don't have a viable state. The state of Israel is continuing to develop settlements on Arab land and to hold control over water rights and do other things that slowly over time progressively extinguish any chance that those Arabs, can I call them Palestinians now, will be able to establish a viable state for themselves. There is International Law about what should be happening, which is supposed to protect the status quo, but Israel with American support, chooses to ignore that law. Little wonder Palestinians are unhappy.
So the question is; Are you a modern person who believes in democracy, seeks to live by global values, respects human rights and the rule of law?
Or are you part of I hope was a previous age; Where the Kings word is the law, my tribe defines my values, and might is right?
I'd like to think that the whole idea of the League of Nations and then the United Nations and whatever is coming next as we improve International Law, is a movement away from the second option towards the first. (Maybe I'm delusional; I do live in hope.)
So can we be "modern people", recognise the RIGHT of the Palestinian people to exist, with their own freely chosen and freely elected government, and can we also recognise their current legal rights under current International Law.
When we've done that, all the other red herrings on the table, tunnels to Egypt, rocket firings, the "right of Israel to exist", suicide bombers and will be seen to be the smoke screen they always were. This "problem" isn't really a problem at all if we as "modern people" choose to solve it.
Of course we can choose to be old fashioned tribal people and beat this up for another hundred years if you can stand the pain. In the end it's a choice. Who are you?
John Stephen Veitch
Open Future Limited - http://www.openfuture.biz/
Innovation Network - http://veech-network.ryze.com/
Building an Open Future - http://openfuture-network.ryze.com/Private Reply to John Stephen Veitch | | Jan 13, 2009 8:24 pm | | re: Israel - Gaza - Some History | # |
John Stephen Veitch | | If you can afford an hour and a half, this video give your the history.
Must Watch Video Documentary: Occupation 101
Award-winning documentary film on the root causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Unlike any other film ever produced on the conflict -- 'Occupation 101' presents a comprehensive analysis of the facts and hidden truths surrounding the never ending controversy and dispels many of its long-perceived myths and misconceptions.
The film also details life under Israeli military rule, the role of the United States in the conflict, and the major obstacles that stand in the way of a lasting and viable peace. The roots of the conflict are explained through first-hand on-the-ground experiences from leading Middle East scholars, peace activists, journalists, religious leaders and humanitarian workers whose voices have too often been suppressed in American media outlets.
The film covers a wide range of topics -- which include -- the first wave of Jewish immigration from Europe in the 1880's, the 1920 tensions, the 1948 war, the 1967 war, the first Intifada of 1987, the Oslo Peace Process, Settlement expansion, the role of the United States Government, the second Intifada of 2000, the separation barrier and the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, as well as many heart wrenching testimonials from victims of this tragedy.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21734.htm
The home site for the film's producers is here.
http://www.occupation101.com/index.html
The Google version of the film is here.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=occupation+101&emb=0#
John Stephen Veitch
Open Future Limited - http://www.openfuture.biz/
Innovation Network - http://veech-network.ryze.com/
Building an Open Future - http://openfuture-network.ryze.com/Private Reply to John Stephen Veitch | | Jan 23, 2009 4:16 am | | re: re: Israel - Gaza - Some History | # |
John Stephen Veitch | | Today from Avaaz, I'm offered some links that try to explain why the media story about Israel and the Palestinians is so biased in favour of the Israeli story.
I want to add something that I think is new, that I've only just become aware of. I've spent the last hour listening to Tim Wise talking about racism, and particularly about the privilege of being white.
"White Like Me" in eight parts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG9h-0UO_Nc&feature=related
He made the point that in 1964, AFTER the early victories of the civil rights movement in the USA, the white elitist culture found new ways to control people who were not white.
One of those was to use the Law against them.
One of those was to use economic force against them.
One of those was to devalue their identity and culture.
In the process of listening I realised that exactly that same process was being used against the Palestinians. That one of the fundamental reasons behind the very strong support for Israel in the USA, was plain old racism.
I've commented before that in public comments, suspicion of Islamic ideals and values is very high among those who strongly support Israel.
These links from Avaaz, are about bias in the US media and on coverage of the recent war in Gaza:
The Blame Game in Gaza - Erasing Israeli actions to fault only Hamas:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3667
Video - Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land:
http://br.youtube.com/watch?v=eCL6WdnuNp4
International Law Seldom Newsworthy in Gaza War - Israeli justifications often cited uncritically:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3672
For a recent US poll which shows the impact of the media bias:
http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/client/act_dsp_pdf.cfm?name=mr090114-2a.pdf&id=4236
Palestine Media Watch report on op-eds:
http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/mediocrity/displayCall.asp?essayID=336
Newsworthy and un-newsworthy deaths:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3057
Video - Media bias about the Israeli - Palestine conflict exposed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kiyyp9cZdY0&NR=1
Video - Biased media reports on the Israeli-Palestinian:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOC1RReb6gc
If Americans Knew - A US project helping to convey alternative perspectives to Americans:
http://www.ifamericansknew.org
John Stephen Veitch
Open Future Limited - http://www.openfuture.biz/
Innovation Network - http://veech-network.ryze.com/
Building an Open Future - http://openfuture-network.ryze.com/Private Reply to John Stephen Veitch | | Jun 23, 2009 7:48 pm | | re: re: re: Israel - Gaza - Some History | # |
John Stephen Veitch | | I write here just to bring this post to the top.
Louise Lyons, has been writing to me about it. I encourage here to join the network and make her comments here, in context.
John Stephen Veitch
Open Future Limited - http://www.openfuture.biz/
Innovation Network - http://veech-network.ryze.com/
Building an Open Future - http://openfuture-network.ryze.com/Private Reply to John Stephen Veitch | | Sep 25, 2009 10:53 am | | re: re: re: re: Israel - Gaza - Some History | # |
Jamie Law | | Thanx for all that information ,you surely know lot about it.
I hope peace comes soon to this region.Private Reply to Jamie Law | | |
| |
| |
