Thursday, March 31, 2011

You "support Israel" - Answer me three simple questions

There is a column in today's Washington Post about a Knesset (Israeli Parliament) Committee investigation of the US Group J Street. J Street is a US Jewish Political Action Committee, which is pro-Israeli and--wait for it--also pro-Peace.

This means among other things that J Street opposes the pursuit of settlements by Israel.

Because of this, a Committee of the Knesset is investigating whether J Street should be called "pro-Israel".

The author of the column, Harold Meyerson, looks at this through the lens of McCarthyism. A fair critique.

I want to look at this through another lens and ask Israel-First people, including the Christian Zionists of America and 90% of the US Congress, a simple set of questions.
  1. If the Israeli government (or a part of it) questions whether you can be pro-Israeli and against settlements, can you infer that the Israeli government (or part of it) is pro-settlements and consider settlements a step forward toward the greater Zionist ideal, Eretz Israel?
    [Hint: the answer is "Yes".]

  2. Is there any scenario possible whereby settlements don't lead to land confiscation, conflict, more deaths and ultimately the deportation, encampment or death of Palestinians?
    [Hint: the answer is "No".]

  3. Can a government which pursues or even simply allows such policies be credible in peace negotiations? Can you, at the same time, be conquering the land and lives of your enemy and negotiating a peace in good faith?
    [Hint: the answer is "No".]
See, I don't think there is a debate to be had about the answer to these three questions, but I'm sure you will find a way if you ever get to read them.

To be a 21st Century Zionist (I don't mean being pro-Israel, its safety and right to exist, but for its expansion and domination of its neighbors, which is what it means more and more), you need to be able to dance around these simple questions. You need to be able to distort the facts, the identity of Palestinians, the history and geography of the place, even the humanity of your neighbors.

Many conquerors have done well with creating their own facts and truths in the pursuit of their ideology. You may win many battles.

But if you're Jewish or Christian... then you have to accommodate your professed faith and ethos with embracing The Lie.

I have only one word for you: "Haram!"

If you don't know what it means, look it up.
Shalom - Salaam - Pax.


Elrig

2 comments:

aparatchik said...

If the Israeli government (or a part of it) questions whether you can be pro-Israeli and against settlements, can you infer that the Israeli government (or part of it) is pro-settlements and consider settlements a step forward toward the greater Zionist ideal, Eretz Israel?
[Hint: the answer is "Yes".]

Yes and so what? Should Jews be barred from buying land in Judea/Samaria and living there?

Is there any scenario possible whereby settlements don't lead to land confiscation, conflict, more deaths and ultimately the deportation, encampment or death of Palestinians?
[Hint: the answer is "No".]

Yes, where Arabs accept Jews as neighbours and not as second-class citizens as was the case during the "Golden [for muslims] Age"

Can a government which pursues or even simply allows such policies be credible in peace negotiations? Can you, at the same time, be conquering the land and lives of your enemy and negotiating a peace in good faith?
[Hint: the answer is "No".]

If the Arabs are against coexistence with Jews, then no. If they are pro coexistence with Jews, then having Jews as neighbours is not a problem.

The Arabs cannot change the way the feel, so Israel either has to live with their resentment and attacks or pay them to leave. The Arabs control 99.8% of the land between Morocco and Iraq in which Jews driven out in the 20th century owned land 4x the size of Israel. The Jews have made a massive net loss in acreage even if you include the West Bank. reconquering the Sinai will make it quits. Bear in mind that the Jewish refugees from Arab countries were (ulike the Arab refugees from Palestine) a) indigenous long before the Arab conquest and b) peaceful and productive citizens who never raised a hand to their neighbours. The Arab Israeli conflict is a case of population transfer in which the Arab regimes took the Jewish land and wealth but refused to take the (smaller number of) Arab refugees.

Elrig Ciles said...

Shalom Aparatchik and thanks for checking the blog. Sorry it's taken so long to 'moderate' and update the comments.

You're basically saying that Palestinians have to pay for the way Arabs one thousand miles away have treated Jews. You're creating parallels which accommodate the injustice you want to support.
And this sort of "balance of injustice" is the same logic applied by radical violent antiSemitic groups against Jews. You apply the same logic as your enemy. At which point do you become twins?

If Jews are buying land in Judea and Samaria, who are they paying for that land? The people kept from their fields by walls, roads and guns?

Your response is a good illustration of my initial point.

And referring to 'second-class' citizens is a strange irony in this context.

Shalom - Salam.