Waarom 1948 een ramp was voor de Palestijnen en Arabieren

Barry Rubin zegt het soms wat erg direct, maar hij heeft wel gelijk. Het zijn de Palestijnen die deling van het land altijd hebben afgewezen en nog steeds niet erkennen dat hun beslissing uit 1948 onjuist was. En hoewel Abbas en zijn regering officieel Israel erkennen, valt dat in de praktijk tegen, en blijkt dat men onder  "Israel" wat anders verstaat dan wat men in Israel zelf denkt. Ook het woord "erkennen" vat Abbas ietwat anders op dan wij denken: het is bij hem meer een soort (tijdelijk) gedogen, in afwachting van betere tijden, terwijl men ondertussen alles doet om Israel te delegitimeren en te isoleren.

 

RP

------

 

 

A Brief Guide to Why 1948 Was a Palestinian Arab and Arab Disaster

Posted: 16 May 2011 05:55 PM PDT

This article is published on PajamasMedia.

By Barry Rubin

In 1947 the UN voted to partition the British mandate of Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state. The Jews accepted partition into two states; the Arabs rejected it.

The international community offered to make Amin al-Husseini, the Palestinian Arabs' leader, head of a state despite the fact that he and his closest colleagues were the subject of a 1938 British arrest warrant for terrorist activities (not mythical but for killing lots of people), and had spent World War Two in Berlin doing pro-Nazi propaganda, recruiting for SS units, and planning a Holocaust of Jews in the Middle East.

But al-Husseini rejected partition and so did all of the Arab states. While Jordan wanted to make a deal and Egypt's government wasn�t enthusiastic, they all had to go along with al-Husseini�s intransigence, their hysterical public opinion, and the other Arab states' pressure. The Arab League's leader, a Nazi agent during World War Two, bragged that the Jews would be massacred. The Muslim Brotherhood, which collaborated with the Nazis during the war and were subsidized by them before the war, sent volunteers to fight the Jews.

And so a Palestinian Arab army, whose three chief commanders had all fought for the Nazis during World War Two, went to war against the Jews using Nazi-supplied weapons (provided for the Palestinian Arab revolt in 1939 and for an Egyptian revolt that never happened in 1942). They lost.

Then the armies of the Arab states invaded Israel. They largely lost, though the Egyptian held onto the Gaza area while the Jordanians took east Jerusalem and what became known as the West Bank. Egypt ran Gaza; Jordan annexed the West Bank.

Everything that happened afterward was due to Arab decisions to reject both a two-state solution and Israel�s creation.

That's the bottom line. So the disaster was due first and foremost to the Palestinian Arab leadership and secondly to the Arab states and publics.

Dealing with the 'nakba' would then require that the Palestinian Arabs and the Arabic-speaking world generally would recognize that the disaster resulted from their refusal to accept Israel's existence and to seek a genuine, compromise two-state solution.

But, instead, in the name of the 1948 disaster they are repeating the same policies that brought it about! Indeed, they are the same policies that led to the self-inflicted disasters of 1967, 2000, and others since then.

For example, as part of the preparations for the commemoration of the 1948 disaster, Palestinian Authority television played repeatedly a music video entitled "On the Way to Jerusalem" The main lines are:

"Jaffa, Acre, Haifa, and Nazareth are ours.

[ I ], Muhammad, sing about the Galilee and the Golan (Heights).
Jaffa, Acre, Haifa and Nazareth are ours."

This is precisely the one-state, wipe-Israel-off-the-map that brought on them the disaster of 1948, disaster every year since then, and more disaster into the forseeable future. Sixty-four years (counting from 1947) of failed policy has not brought wisdom.

Almost every event--Egypt's revolution, demonstrators trying to cross Israel's border, a terrorist attack, Western sympathy, and so on--is interpreted as proving that Israel's destruction is possible and so additional decades should be spent in diplomatic intransigence and the incitement of violence rather than some constructive effort. That's one reason, by the way, why the Palestinians always ultimately lose.

This has also been going on so long that much of the West has forgotten the roots and ongoing causes of this conflict, Palestinian suffering, Israeli suffering, and the terrorist violence and defamation of Israel.

Note: The use of the words 'Nazi collaborator' and other mentions of pro-Nazi activities in this article are not name-calling but based on German and U.S. intelligence materials. These points will be fully and in detail documented in the forthcoming book by myself and Wolfgang Schwanitz, to be published by Yale University Press next year.

=================

Tell Me What They're Reading and I'll Tell You Who Will Win?

Posted: 16 May 2011 10:24 AM PDT

This article is published in PajamasMedia.

By Barry Rubin

There's an interesting point about pre-World War One Europe that applies very well to today's international situation as well. In Guns of August, Barbara Tuchman pointed out the difference between what the British and Germans were reading on the eve of the war.

In 1909 Norman Angell, a British member of parliament wrote a pamphlet, "The Great Illusion," that became a best-seller. It argued that since war had become so terrible and governments were rational and would understand this, another major international war was impossible.

But in Germany they were reading Friedrich von Bernhardi's Germany and the Next War,  where he argues that "war is a biological necessity" based on the law of nature, the struggle for existence.

Germany was preparing for war; Britain was pacifist. The same process repeated itself before World War Two. And the same process was again repeated in the brief time between the end of World War Two and the Cold War.

Each time, though, the "less prepared" but more democratic side won in the end. Still, because the "fat, materialistic, having a good time" democracies took too long to realize what was going on and the resulting conflict took longer and cost more lives than might have been possible.

In 1940, John F. Kennedy published Why England Slept, a book about how British appeasement helped create an atmosphere where Nazi aggression prospered. Of course, his own father had favored and encouraged those policies. Of course, the war he was "warning" about had already begun the previous year. But the surprise attack that killed about 2400 Americans and brought the United States into the war took place more than a year later.

Twenty years later, Kennedy was elected president.

In 2006, Bruce Bawer published When Europe Slept. It was nominated for a National Book Critics Circle Award. One panel member described the book as "racist," while the group's president lamented, "I have never been more embarrassed by a choice" and called it an example of "Islamophobia." Needless to say, he didn't win the award.

For anyone to have read the book and made such statements is a measure of the intellectual insanity that has seized hegemony in the West. Bawer's book was published not one but five years after the conflict he described had already visibly emerged in the form of 3000 Americans killed in a surprise terrorist attack on New York and Washington. As of today, the United States is engaged in three different wars relating to the issues he discussed.

So far nobody's been talking about electing Bawer president.

We can call this state of being, post-September 11 snoring.

We're in the grip of a new version of Angell's "The Great Illusion," a double-edged title if there ever was one. Surely, nobody could want a radical Islamist state! Certainly, nobody would be willing to sacrifice their life for such a thing! Nor would anyone conceivably prefer martyrdom and murder to having a nice toaster and a hybrid car!

That's why all of this talk about Usama bin Ladin hiding behind women, pleading for his life, doing drugs, and having a pornography library really bothers me. Such things stem from this need to prove the other side doesn't really mean what it says, they're really just sybaritic, materialistic, hedonistic hypocrites. Because if they are, well there really isn't any threat, is there? They can be bought off.

Meanwhile, anyone who examines the real politics, current religious thinking, and actual behavior doesn't get an award but is slandered instead. Or, at best, is ignored and barred from access to the mass media's audience.

Yet every day on the other side, the argument is openly and publicly being made that--in a slight paraphrase of von Bernhardi's theme--that war is a religious necessity (jihad) based on the law of the divine being and natural struggle for existence.

And simply repeating what that side is saying daily is a thought crime.

Last October, I published an article about the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood's declaration of war against the United States. A few months before the Egyptian revolution, the speech by the Brotherhood's leader made clear that it was a radical, Islamist, antisemitic, anti-American movement that incited violence.

Not a single mass media television station or newspaper has mentioned that speech to this day, despite huge coverage of the Muslim Brotherhood. The chiefs of American intelligence seem to remain unaware of it. On the contrary, one could find hundreds (thousands?) of claims that the Brotherhood is secular, moderate, pro-democratic, and against violence.

Recently I was interviewed on a big-city radio station. When I made some of these points, the show's host retorted that their correspondent in Cairo "speaks lots of languages," is very experienced, and hadn't mentioned any of these things. So why should he believe me?

Don't believe me, I explained (without any success in this case). Believe what America's enemies are reading, and saying, and doing. Of course, to do that you first have to know about what they're reading, saying, and doing.

==============
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal, and a featured columnist at PajamasMedia http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/ His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center is http://www.gloria-center.org. His PajamaMedia columns are mirrored and other articles available at http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com/

 

Veel sympathie voor extremisten onder Palestijnse Arabieren

Geregeld krijg ik enquetes met verontrustende resultaten te zien wat betreft de ideeën en visies van de Arabische bevolking. Een paar jaar geleden bleek uit een PEW Global Attitudes poll dat 98% van de Jordaniers en Libanezen er antisemitische ideeën op na hield. Ook de steun voor Bin Laden en Hezbollah bleek schrikbarend hoog. Onlangs bleek dat een overgrote meerderheid van de Egyptenaren het vredesverdrag met Israel wil opzeggen en dat de meeste Palestijnen liever een Arabische dictatuur willen en/of shariawetgeving  dan een op Westerse leest geschoeide democratie. Toch blijven velen er in het Westen er vanuit gaan dat de Arabieren de straat op gaan voor vrijheid en democratie, en dat het afzetten van de oude machthebbers die een stukje dichterbij zal brengen. De nieuwste PEW Global Attitudes poll is wat dat betreft niet erg hoopgevend. De steun voor islamitisch fundamentalisme en shariawetgeving is groot, en grote meerderheden zijn anti-Amerika. Hamas wordt door bijna de helft van de bevolking in Egypte en Jordanië positief gewaardeerd, en tweederde van de Palestijnen vindt zelfmoordaanslagen soms of vaak gerechtvaardigd. Ook kan Hezbollah op een steun van meer dan 60% rekenen bij de Palestijnen.

 

RP

---------

 

Poll: Palestinian Arabs prefer Al Qaeda to Obama; they still support terror

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/05/poll-palestinian-arabs-prefer-al-qaeda.html

 

 

A new Pew Global attitudes poll reveals once again how those "peace loving" Palestinian Arabs really think.

If you judge how worthy people are to deserve a state by how they feel about violence and Islamism, then the Palestinian Arabs are pretty much the least deserving people in the Middle East.

Let's start off with a quick comparison of two answers:

 

 

28% of Palestinian Arabs have a favorable opinion of Al Qaeda, and only 18% of President Obama.

 

And Hezbollah rates higher among Palestinian Arabs than any other Arabs.

 

 

A plurality of Palestinian Arabs sympathize with Islamic fundamentalists - and a quarter of Israeli Arab (Muslims) agree.

 

 

 

A new state of Palestine will, right off the bat, hate America. A whopping 80% of Palestinian Arabs have an unfavorable view towards the US.

 

 

 

Over a third of PalArabs want a nation that adheres strictly to Shari'a law, and 30% more want it to be influenced by Islamic law. (Jordan's and Egypt's numbers in this question are very troubling for those who want to see a true Arab Spring.)

 

 

No surveyed people support Islamic fundamentalists more than Palestinian Arabs, except for Pakistan.

 

Comparing the answers from Jordan and Egypt to the previous two questions makes it clear that in those countries, people do not define "fundamentalist" as equivalent to "strict adherence to Sharia law." This is something to remember when people claim that those nations do not embrace fundamentalism.

 

 

Hamas' popularity has gone down in the past few years, especially in Gaza, but the movement is still a major force.

 

 

No one loves Hezbollah more than PalArabs.

 

 

Fully two thirds of all Palestinian Arabs believe that suicide terrorism is often or sometimes justified, making them unique among all people in continuing to embrace that form of what they call "resistance." No other country showed a rate of approval of suicide bombing that was even close to that of the "moderate" Palestinian Arabs.

 

And while most Muslim countries have exhibited a steep decline in approval for suicide bombs over the years, the Palestinian Arab enthusiasm for that particularly gruesome method of killing civilians has stayed relatively steady.

 

 

So when we look at whether "Palestine" is ready for statehood, should we trust the World Bank's arcane justifications or should we look at whether the country would contribute or detract from world peace?

As it stands, it is clear that "Palestine" will not make the world a more peaceful place. Quite the contrary.

 

De geschiedenis van Palestijns-Arabisch geweld tegen Joden

 

Dries van Agt, Anja Meulenbelt en de andere 'usual suspects' beweren graag dat de Palestijnen eigenlijk vooral vreedzaam protesteren tegen hun 'onderdrukking', en dat dat gezien de schaal van het onrecht dat hun zou zijn aangedaan eigenlijk heel bijzonder is. Volgens Van Agt en Meulenbelt begonnen de Palestijnen pas in 1994 met zelfmoordaanslagen, in reactie op het bloedbad dat Baruch Goldstein in Hebron had aangericht. Dat is niet waar: de arts Goldstein handelde juist in reactie op een Palestijnse aanslag, waarbij een vriend in zijn armen stierf. Er was in 1993 al een zelfmoordaanslag gepleegd, om van de talloze andere aanslagen en kapingen in de decennia daarvoor maar te zwijgen. De zelfmoordaanslag was gewoon een nieuwe techniek, wellicht afgekeken van de Tamil Tijgers, nadat bus- en treinkapingen onmogelijk waren geworden door de strengere Israelische veiligheidsmaatregelen, zoals nu de raketten en schietincidenten zoals in Itamar de zelfmoordaanslag lijken te vervangen, ook weer vanwege verbeterde Israelische veiligheidsmaatregelen. Het Arabische verzet tegen de Joden in Palestina is vanaf het begin gewelddadig geweest, wat niet wil zeggen dat er geen vreedzame protesten zijn (geweest).

 

Een andere mythe van de pro-Palestina lobby is dat (gewelddadig) verzet tegen de bezetting natuurlijk is en zelfs zou zijn verankerd in het internationale recht. Ook dat is onzin: het bewust doden van burgers van de vijand of bezetter is een uitzondering en wordt in geen enkel verdrag of conventie goedgekeurd. Tijdens de oorlog hebben Nederlanders zich niet in Duitsland opgeblazen of bestormden de grenzen en gingen wild om zich heen schieten. Het verzet was gericht tegen de daadwerkelijke bezetters en was vooral vreedzaam. Ook het verzet in Zuid-Afrika was grotendeels vreedzaam, en het gewelddadige verzet was gericht tegen de daadwerkelijke machthebbers en de infrastructuur en symbolen van de onderdrukking. De Tibetanen hebben zelden geweld gebruikt, en ook de Saharanen hebben geen supermarkten en restaurants in Marrakech opgeblazen (of het moeten Al Qaida cellen geweest zijn).

 

Perioden van geweld zijn meestal ook vrij kort in tijd, zoals de gewelddadige en soms terroristische acties van de Irgun in Palestina. Dit was bovendien een reactie op het vele geweld tegen burgers van Arabische zijde en de Britse bezetting, waarbij alle eerder gedane beloftes en afspraken werden geschonden.

De Palestijnen verzetten zich al vanaf 1920 met geweld, dat is inmiddels 91 jaar. In al die tijd hebben zich vele mogelijkheden voorgedaan om tot een compromis te komen, om een deel van wat ze willen binnen te halen via onderhandelingen. Er deden zich meer kansen voor, en werd (en wordt) meer naar ze geluisterd dan naar de Tibetanen, Koerden, West-Saharanen en andere onderdrukte volken. Dat ze nog steeds geen staat hebben valt dan ook niet in de eerste plaats Israel te verwijten.

 

RP & WB

----------------------

 

 

The myth of Palestinian Arab non-violent "resistance" (updated)

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/05/myth-of-palestinian-arab-non-violent.html

 

 

In Foreign Policy, Yousef Munayyer writes about "Palestine's Hidden History of Nonviolence."

He implies that the first organized violence done by Palestinian Arabs was only in 1935:

"It wasn't until nonviolent protests were met with severe repression that Palestinian guerrilla movements began. After the 81-year-old Husseini died a few months after being beaten, a young imam living in Haifa named Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam (the namesake of Hamas's military wing) organized the first militant operation against the British mandatory government. His death in battle with British soldiers sparked the Arab rebellion that began in 1936 and lasted until 1939."

Amazingly, Munayyer doesn't say a word about the 1920 Arab riots (5 Jews killed), the 1921 Arab riots (43 Jews killed) and the 1929 Arab pogroms (over 100 Jews slaughtered) - riots that were planned and coordinated by the infamous Mufti of Jerusalem.

Was this an oversight, or purposeful deception on Munayyer's part? Well, let's look at how he describes the Arab revolts of 1936-1939, which Arabs call the Great Rebellion:

The first phases of this revolt began with nonviolent resistance in the form of more strikes and protests, and the economy ground to a halt for six months when Palestinian leaders called for a work stoppage. This was put down harshly by the mandatory government, according to British historian Matthew Hughes, including the bombing of more than 200 buildings in Jaffa on June 16, 1936. The repression of both violent and nonviolent Palestinian dissent significantly destroyed the capacity of Palestinian society, paving the way for the depopulation of Palestine and the establishment of the state of Israel a decade later.

The idea that the first six months of the revolt were non-violent is a complete falsehood. As I have proven previously, Arabs were killing Jews from the very beginning of the revolt, in April 1936. On April 22, 7 were killed in Jaffa. Later that week some 6000 Jaffa Jews evacuated their homes from fear of the "nonviolent" demonstrations.

In May, three were killed at a bomb thrown at the Edison Cinema, and three more were shot dead in Jerusalem.

The "Great Revolt" was violent through and through, and ended up with the murders of not only many Jews and British, but also Arabs killing hundreds of other Arabs who they felt were not sufficiently supportive of the cause.

Munayyer then goes on to come up with a new definition of non-violent resistance:

In reality, even though the majority of the native inhabitants were depopulated during the Nakba, thousands of Palestinians practiced nonviolent resistance by refusing to leave their homes when threatened.

Here he turns history on its head. Many, if not most, Arab communities were not directly threatened by the Zionists - in fact, there were major communities like Jaffa where the Zionists called for the Arabs to stay, yet those who stayed were threatened by other Arabs for "collaborating" with the Zionists. Now, Munayyer is saying that the ones who stayed in fact were practicing resistance against the Zionists!

His lies don't end there.

The first and second intifadas were very different. In the first intifada of the late 1980s, Palestinians employed various nonviolent tactics, from mass demonstrations to strikes to protests. Even though the vast majority of the activism was nonviolent, it is the mostly symbolic stone-throwing that many remember.

In fact, there were some 164 Israelis killed during that "non-violent" intifada. Not only that, but about 1000 Palestinian Arabs were killed - by other Palestinian Arabs, who claimed that they were "collaborators'!

Yet, only 12 of the 70,000 Israeli soldiers regularly posted in occupied territories during the intifada died in the four-year uprising, clearly demonstrating the restraint with which Palestinian dissent was carried out.

Notice how he frames his statement, that "only" 12 soldiers in the territories were killed. In fact, in total, some 60 of Israel's fatalities were soldiers.

The only conclusion is that Munayyer is knowingly being deceptive towards his audience, banking on the fact that most people do not check "facts" that are stated so unequivocally.

Munayyer is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the readers of his column. Will anyone call him on it?

(h/t Omri Ceren via tweet)

UPDATE: The very knowledgeable Yisrael Medad adds that Al-Qassam's organized terror group started around 1930, and that the first violent act of the 1936 Arab riots occurred a week earlier than I stated, on April 15th, with the murder of two Jews near Nur Shams.

 

Palestijnen als Amerikaanse Indianen

 

Overeenkomsten zijn er wel tussen Palestijnse Arabieren en Amerikaanse Indianen en Aboriginals: door immigratie van een ander volk met een andere cultuur werden ze een minderheid in het gebied waar de meesten van hen al eeuwen woonden, en onderdanen van een door (grotendeels) immigranten gestichte staat. Een van de verschillen is dat het Joodse volk oude wortels had in het land van Israel, sommigen er ook al eeuwenlang woonden en honderdduizenden van hen al eeuwen verspreid door de Arabische wereld woonden, maar de Joden nergens een eigen land hadden terwijl er een twintigtal Arabische landen waren.

 

Wouter

_____________

http://dvardealpl.blogspot.com/2011/05/palestinians-as-native-americans.html

Palestinians as Native Americans, The Dispossessed Natives Canard, an unfounded analogy

A reoccurring lie regarding the Israeli Palestinian conflict is the false analogy between Palestinians and Native Americans and Australian Aborigines. This analogy claims that the Palestinians are like the Native Americans, an indigenous population dispossessed by people who came to their land by ships. In fact there is not a single comparable point between the Palestinian story and that of the Native Americans and the Australian Aborigines.

To begin with Native Americans and Australian Aborigines never kept white Europeans in ghettos like quarters and taxed them for having a different religion then they had. On the contrary, they welcomed the new arrivals, and helped them adjust to their new surroundings.

However some of those new arrivals did not acknowledge the humanity of their new neighbors and preformed horrific mass murder attacks on them, such as pogroms and massacres.

This kind of behavior is something they brought from Europe. There the ruling/dominant religion or nationality oppressed violently other religions and nationalities. In this Europe the perpetrators and the victims were diverse. Protestants persecuted Catholics and Jews, Catholics persecuted Protestants, Jews, Muslims and Eastern Orthodox, and Eastern Orthodox persecuted Jews, Catholics, and Muslims.

The Muslim world, which ruled parts of Europe for the greater part of the last 1300 years, was no different. It treated minorities and conquered population in the same manner, subjecting Christian, Jews and other branches of Islam, to intolerance, backed on more than one occasion by brutal violence. Violence that was no different then the brutal violence Europeans inflicted on the native populations of the Americas, Africa, and Australia.

Both the Christian world and the Muslim world had produced kingdoms and empires that were authoritarian theocracies, and therefore intolerant and brutal towards those who were different. When nation states emerged from those kingdoms and empires, many of them inherited this conduct, implementing it on neighboring nationalities and conquered nations. Europe's first colonies were in Europe. And the Ottoman Empire had its colonies in the Balkans, as well as in the Middle East.

Zionism, as the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, took the Jews from this vulnerable position, and gave them national sovereignty in their national homeland. There, Jews are able to protect themselves from such violence. In doing so Zionism was a part a world wide anti imperialist effort. One, which included the liberated nations of Europe, de-colonialism, and civil rights movements across the world.
Like all liberation movements, Zionism faced its enemies, as it does today; enemies that are not much different than past repressors, as the hallmark of deliberately targeting and killing civilians, men, women, and children, repeatedly testifies.

Syrische hypocrisie over Israel

Het volgende behoeft eigenlijk geen commentaar. Overigens is niet alleen Syrië hypocriet, dat de nakba herdenkingen aanwendde om de aandacht even van de eigen misdaden af te leiden. Veel Nederlandse media doen ook hun duit in het zakje. Zo is er op Joop.nl een felle discussie, en spenderen antizionisten als Stan van Houcke dagen om aan te tonen hoe misdadig Israel is, terwijl men zwijgt over wat Syrië haar burgerbevolking aandoet. Verschillende reaguurders spreken op Joop.nl hun walging uit over Israels reactie op het bestormen van haar grenzen, maar houden hun mond wanneer Syrië haar eigen burgers doodschiet, oppakt, opjaagt, martelt en uithongert. Men keurt dit ongetwijfeld ook af, maar het roept verder geen bijzondere emoties op. Iedere Israelische actie, terecht of niet, roept daarentegen de felste emoties en afkeuring op, en de vergelijkingen met Hitler zijn snel gemaakt. Heeft iemand het handelen van de Syrische geheime dienst al met de nazi's vergeleken? Ik ben het nog niet tegen gekomen. Ook geen vlammende columns van Von der Dunk over dit onrecht. Nee, die trapt een beetje tegen de nieuwe Volkskrant columnist Bert Brussen, en ze zijn in een nietszeggend debatje verzeild over de 'gutmensch'.

 

RP

--------

 

Zeven Syriërs gedood in Tel Kelakh door regeringstroepen'

http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/05/15/zeven-syriers-gedood-in-tel-kelakh-door-regeringstroepen/

door Hans Klis

 

Zeker zeven Syrische burgers zijn vandaag omgekomen toen regeringstroepen de stad Tel Kelakh onder vuur namen.

Dit melden activisten aan persbureau Reuters. Syrische troepen proberen demonstraties tegen het regime in de stad aan de Libanese grens met tanks en bombardementen de kop in te drukken. De bombardementen concentreerden zich op verschillende wijken in de stad. Volgens activisten kunnen gewonde burgers niet naar het ziekenhuis omdat deze afgesloten is door veiligheidsdiensten. Gisteren vielen ook al drie doden door beschietingen in de stad.

De Libanese autoriteiten hebben de grenscontrole verscherpt nadat grote aantallen Syrische burgers de grens naar Libanon overstaken. Volgens een Libanese woordvoerder willen de autoriteiten voorkomen dat mensen illegaal het land binnen komen. De afgelopen weken hebben volgens Libanon al honderden Syriërs hun land ontvlucht.

Een gevluchte inwoner van Tel Kelakh vertelde op de Libanese televisie dat aanhangers van de Syrische president Bashar al-Assad met messen door de straat lopen op zoek naar demonstranten en dat zij gesteund worden door het leger en de politie.

 

Syrië veroordeelt Israëlische beschietingen

http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/05/15/syrie-veroordeelt-israelische-beschietingen/

De Syrische autoriteiten veroordelen de Israëlische beschietingen van betogers bij de grens bij de Golanhoogvlakte, de Palestijnse gebieden en bij de grens met Libanon.

In een verklaring van het Syrische ministerie worden de beschietingen bestempeld als "criminele activiteiten", meldt persbureau Reuters. Volgens het Syrisch staatspersbureau SANA houdt het ministerie de internationale gemeenschap verantwoordelijk voor de incidenten en noemt dit de bloedigste confrontatie in jaren.

Het Israëlische leger voerde onder andere een aanval uit op een groep Syriërs die de grens bij de Golanhoogvlakte wilde oversteken. Volgens een televisiezender werden hierbij zeker vier mensen gedood en raakten zeker zestig mensen aan beide kanten van de grens gewond. Het Israëlische leger zei eerder dat er alleen waarschuwingsschoten zijn gelost.

Abbas presenteert heel Israel als "mijn land"

 

De twee gezichten van Fatah: in de New York Times verklaart Abbas dat hij naar een staat binnen de pre-1967 wapenstilstandslijnen streeft, of dat suggereert hij in elk geval, maar ondertussen wordt op een Fatah bijeenkomst het hele land als Palestijns bezongen. Ook op de officiele PA TV en in media die gelieerd zijn aan Fatah, wordt het hele land als Palestijns voorgesteld en soms zelfs expliciet tot "bevrijding" van het hele land opgeroepen.

 

RP

---------

Entertainment for Abbas and PA leaders:  

All of Israel is "my land"  

http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=5030

by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook 

Contrary to the PA leaders' claim that they recognize Israel's right to exist, their controlled TV and cultural events continue to reinforce the message of non-recognition of Israel by depicting all of Israel as "Palestine."

At a recent Fatah event in the presence of Mahmoud Abbas and many other senior PA officials, a Palestinian singer defined all of Israel as being Palestinian. He sings that "my land" and "our coast" span from Rosh Hanikra in Israel's north to Rafah in the Gaza Strip in the South, and from Haifa on Israel's Western coast to Beit Shean on Israel's Eastern border.

The Fatah members filling the large auditorium are shown clapping enthusiastically to the song. The event was rebroadcast on PA TV on May 12, 2011.

Click to view

The following are the words of the song at the Fatah event:

"We commit and promise to stand behind you, oh Mahmoud Abbas, until Judgment Day. I am returning to you, the purest land, oh land of the free. No matter how long the nights of exile, I am returning to you, oh land. From Rafah to Rosh Hanikra (northern Israel) our coast, and Beit Shean (Israeli city). Above your soil, oh my land, is a picture of Garden of Eden. From Rafah to Rosh Hanikra our coast, and Beit Shean. Above your soil, oh my land, is a picture of Garden of Eden. From Rafah to Rosh Hanikra, north and south, are the picture's borders. From Haifa (Israeli city) and Tantura to the [Jordan] valley (i.e., all of Israel). I am returning to you, the purest land, oh land of the free."

[PA TV (Fatah), Feb. 27 and May 12, 2011]

On April 13, PA TV broadcast a different song presenting all Israeli cities as Palestinian.
Click to see more examples of PA non-recognition of Israel
Click to see more examples of Abbas's non-recognition of Israel

================================

p:+972 2 625 4140  e: pmw@palwatch.org
f: +972 2 624 2803 w: www.palwatch.org

PMW | King George 59 | Jerusalem | Israel

Click here to view PMW's website

 

Nakba Dag: aanslag, rellen en grensinfiltraties op Israels verjaardag

 

Het CIDI geeft een overzicht van de gebeurtenissen van afgelopen weekend rond de Nakba-herdenking.

Israel had haar 63ste verjaardag al eerder gevierd conform de Joods kalender.

 

Wouter

_______________

 

 

CIDI - Centrum Informatie en Documentatie Israël

http://www.nieuwsbank.nl/inp/2011/05/16/X005.htm

Aanslag, rellen en grensinfiltraties op Israels verjaardag

ma 16-05-2011

Op 14 / 15 mei bestond Israel 63 jaar. Dit wordt in de Arabische wereld herdacht als Nakba Dag of de dag van de Catastrofe. In Tel Aviv werd op die dag deze week een aanslag gepleegd door een Palestijnse vrachtwagen chauffeur die op mensen inreed, waarbij een dode viel en veertien gewonden. Er waren rellen aan Israels grenzen en in Jeruzalem.

Voorafgaand aan vijftien mei werd de Arabische wereld, onder andere door middel van facebook, opgeroepen tot rellen en marsen naar Israels grenzen. Sommigen wilden zelfs een derde intifada beginnen. Ondanks de vele onlusten is er van dat laatste nog geen sprake. In Israel worden de rellen van dit weekend wel gezien als een voorbereiding op september. Er worden dan gelijksoortige problemen verwacht wanneer de Palestijnen eenzijdig een eigen staat willen uitroepen.

Op veertien mei werd in Jeruzalem bij een demonstratie ook een Palestijnse jongen neergeschoten. Terwijl politie en demonstranten aan het vechten waren, werd er volgens omstanders uit het raam van een nabij gelegen gebouw geschoten. De zestien jarige Milad Ayyash overleed aan zijn verwondingen. Volgens de politie is de dader voortvluchtig en wordt het onderzoek bemoeilijkt door het feit dat de nabestaanden geen autopsie wilden laten verrichten.

Op Nakba dag zelf waren er tal van incidenten. De ergste problemen waren aan de grenzen met Libanon en Syrië, waar de Palestijnse demonstranten de grenshekken naar beneden probeerden te halen en sommigen zelfs de grens overstaken. Zowel de Libanese troepen als het Israelische leger schoten op de demonstranten om te voorkomen dat zij de grens zouden overgaan. Volgens het Libanese leger vielen er tien doden en meer dan honderd gewonden en volgens Syrië zijn er twee mensen aan hun grens gedood. Het Israelische leger is de hele nacht op zoek geweest naar Syrische infiltranten die bij de rellen de grens zijn overgestoken. De laatsten zijn op maandag teruggestuurd naar Syrië.

De Syrische president Assad hoopte de aandacht af te leiden van de onderdrukking van de demonstraties in Syrië door de aandacht te vestigen op de Nakba rellen en Israel. Dit is niet gelukt, want de media berichtten alsnog over het geweld dat Syrië tegen de demonstranten gebruikt. Israel heeft inmiddels een klacht ingediend bij de Veiligheidsraad van de VN tegen Libanon en Syrië voor het schenden van internationale verdragen.

Egypte zette de politie ingezet om te zorgen dat demonstranten in Cairo de Israelische ambassade niet aanvielen en om te voorkomen dat er mensen naar de grensovergang met Gaza zouden gaan. Jordanië onderschepte demonstranten voordat zij bij de grens konden komen.

De Palestijnse president Abbas heeft gezegd dat `het bloed van hen die gedood werden, niet tervergeefs zal zijn. Hun bloed werd gegeven voor de vrijheid van het Palestijnse volk en voor hun rechten.' Ismail Haniyeh, de leider van Hamas, riep gelovigen in Gaza op om te bidden voor het einde van de staat Israel en sprak over de hoop `een einde te maken aan het Zionistische project in Palestina'. De Israelische premier Netanyahu heeft laten weten dat Israel zijn grenzen en souvereiniteit zal verdedigen. Ook zei hij dat de Nakba demonstranten het niet hebben over de grenzen van 1967, maar dat zij het bestaansrecht van Israel zelf betwistten.

 

De Joodse Nakba: hoe Arabieren Joodse eigendommen stalen

Yemeni Jews' aliyah. Property looted

 

Dit vind ik raar, maar misschien doelt hij alleen op de Joden van Libië:

 

"The average Jew lived much better than the average Muslims, and in fact – much better than the Jews in Eastern Europe" says Yaakov Hajaj, director of the Institute for the Research and Study of Libyan Jewry.

 

Zeker in Marokko waren er ook veel arme Joden, die als eersten naar Israel emigreerden, en zou er ook vanaf de 19de eeuw sprake zijn geweest van Joodse getto's, wat in onderstaand artikel ontkend lijkt te worden. Daar de situatie naar tijd en plaats zeer kon verschillen, is bij de onderstaande citaten meermaals onduidelijk hoe algemeen ze op te vatten zijn.

 

Zie ook: Vergeten vluchtelingen

 

Wouter

_____________

 

How Arabs stole Jewish property

As Palestinians mark 'Nakba Day,' history shows Jews were dispossessed of all their assets too after escaping Arab countries between 1944-1964

Tani Goldstein

The Palestinian people are marking their annual "Nakba Day" on Sunday, commemorating the escape and expulsion of the Palestinians from the State of Israel upon its establishment.

In addition to the uprooting, the Palestinians are protesting against the nationalization and robbery of the property they left behind, while they have been living in poverty in refugee camps.

But there are two sides to every coin. Between the years 1944 and 1964, some 700,000 Jews moved in the opposite direction, from Arab countries to Israel – and they too were dispossessed of nearly their entire property.

'Better life than in Eastern Europe'

Jews have been living in the Middle East since the Babylonian captivity and in North Africa since the Roman era. During the Arab occupation, the majority of world Jews lived in this area.

Since then, the center of the Jewish world moved the Eastern Europe due to immigration, and Jews' conversion to Islam in Arab countries and to Christianity in Europe. In 1940, there were some 16 million Jews in the world, and only 5% of them – 800,000 – lived in Arab countries, mostly in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Iraq and Egypt.

The Jews' situation in Arab countries varied as times changed and depending on the countries they lived in: In some places they integrated into society and were even part of the upper class, in other places they were subject to restrictions, and from time to time they suffered from riots and persecution.

In general, the Muslims treated the Jews much better than in Europe and their economic situation was excellent.

"The average Jew lived much better than the average Muslims, and in fact – much better than the Jews in Eastern Europe" says Yaakov Hajaj, director of the Institute for the Research and Study of Libyan Jewry.

"They could work in whatever they wanted to. Most of them worked in certain fields, some of which were basically under their control: As tailors, shoemakers, goldsmiths, imprinters, spice merchants, grocery store owners, peddlers and even international traders."

"Most Jews and Christians worked in industries that the Muslims banned themselves from working in," says Dr. Zvi Yehuda, director of the Research Institute of Babylonian Jewry.

"The Muslims were strict about not engaging in loan with interest, which included any dealing with silver and gold, and most goldsmiths were Jews. Most seamstresses were Jewish, and so were most tailors later on. As opposed to Europe, the Muslims did not hate the Jews because they dealt with money, and even admired them for that.

'Jews took less of a bribe'

The Middle East and North Africa – excluding Iran and Morocco – became part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire in the 16th century. The Ottoman regime, as opposed to the preceding Arab regime, absorbed Jews into its governmental organizations.

"Many government workers, judges and tax collectors were Jewish, way beyond their percentage in the population," notes Hajaj. "They were considered reliable people who took less of a bribe. A Jew could not afford to get into trouble for 40 dinars, for fear of harming the entire community."

A small part of the Jews, mainly in Yemen and Morocco, lived in villages. But most lived in their own neighborhoods in the cities, in big and spacious houses.

"There was a 'street of Jews' or a 'Jewish quarter' in nearly every city, but it wasn't a ghetto," says Hajaj. "There was no wall and the Jews were there out of their own free will, in order to keep kosher and observe Shabbat and stop different vagabonds from coming in and harassing them.

"The typical family lived in a complex of several houses, a house for each brother, around an internal courtyard. It was completely different than the cabins of the Muslim peasants and the huts in Jewish towns in Europe."

In the 19th century, the Arab world was subject to colonization: Britain took over Egypt, France took over Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco, and Italy took over Libya.

Iraq, Syria and the Land of Israel remained under the Ottoman Empire, but it collapsed and was gradually taken over by Western powers, until its occupation in World War I. The situation changed in favor of the Jews.

"The Jews became mediators between Europe and the Arabs," says Hajaj. "They wandered in the world, got to know countries and languages, had ties in Europe, and everyone trusted them.

"They sold the Europeans cloths, threads and Arab agricultural produce, as well as exotic goods like ostrich feathers from Africa and imported clothes and industrial products from Europe. They gave the peasants advanced payments and made sure that they supplied the goods. Many became rich, particularly in cities off the Mediterranean Coast and in Iraq. Some got a European citizenship and adopted European customs."

How did the Muslims react?

"At first it was convenient. They trusted the Jews more than they trusted each other. Their trust collapsed in the 20th century, upon the creation of Arab patriotism and Zionism."

'Baghdad market closed on Shabbat'

The extent of the Jewish success varied from country to country. "People who visited Iraq in the 19th century wrote that the Jews control the economy," says Yehuda. "The markets were closed on Shabbat. Jews were part of the government. When professions like advocacy were created, Jews were prominent in them too.

"In Syria the Muslims were tougher and restricted the Jews, while in Kurdistan the economy was stuck on exchange trade, like in the Middle Ages: The Muslim gave the Jews knitting wool and the Jews gave them back clothes."

There were differences within the communities as well: There were poor people everywhere who needed charity organizations, alongside families like Daniel in Iraq and Arbiv, Halfon and Nahum in North Africa, that became regional "Rothschilds" and had capital, real estate and factories.

"In the East there were no billionaires like Baron Hirsch," Yehuda notes. "But whoever had 1,000 pounds and 10 houses was considered very rich. On the other hand, most of the goldsmiths lived from hand to mouth and in harsh competition with big companies, some of which belonged to rich Jews."

The Middle East is the cradle of science and education in the world. The first university in the world was opened in the 9th century in Qayrawan, Tunisia – and its first class had Jewish students too. However, the education revolution Europe underwent in the 18th century skipped Arab countries, including the Jews.

"In North Africa there were hardly any universities," says Hajaj. "In all of Libya there were 14 PhDs. But many of the Jews were self-educated and studied geography, languages and history while travelling the world.

"Iraq's Jews were exceptional: All young people there had a high school education and some even had university degrees."

'A Jew shouldn't control Muslims'

The Jews' situation began deteriorating with the Arab national awakening, before the State of Israel's establishment. "From a British mandate, Iraq turned into an autonomic state in 1932 and immediately began disinheriting the Jews," says Yehuda.

"They weren't accepted to schools and universities and were dismissed from jobs with all sorts of claims."

Who led the restrictions?

"The Arab nationalists and the militant Muslims. The establishment was not happy with the situation but was dragged into it, and most of the population was ambivalent: In day-to-day life they had friendly relations with the Jews, but when a Jew was appointed as a judge or government worker it bothered them, because according to their perception, a Jew is not supposed to control Muslims."

Upon the establishment of the State of Israel, the Arab world was flooded with violent riots, massacres and plunder against the Jews. Some of the Arab governments defended the Jews, while others – mainly in Iraq and Yemen – inflamed the riots and looting.

"The Iraqi government confiscated property, as if to compensate the Palestinian refugees," says Yehuda. "Government workers would arrive at a business and ask the Jewish owner how much he would like to 'donate' to the refugees. If he wouldn't – that was the end of the business. Most of the property reached people with ties to the government."

In 1951, the Iraqi government quietly agreed to let Jews immigrate to Israel, and almost all of them did. At the same time, it enacted a law stating that the entire Jewish property – houses, factories, goods, jewelry and bank accounts – would be nationalized.

Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser enacted similar laws after the Lavon Affair and the Sinai war. Libya's Jews were expelled and their property was nationalized in the 1960s. "(Libya leader Muammar) Gaddafi promised to return everything within 30 years," notes Hajaj, "but at the moment he's busy with other stuff."

Syria, Tunisia and Algeria did not nationalize property, but the Jews fled those countries when they gained independence (1946, 1959 and 1962, respectively), and the Muslims looted the remaining property. That is what happened to the property of Yemeni Jews who made aliyah in Operation Magic Carpet as well.

"Some of Morocco's Jews 'got off easy': They immigrated with the money and property and 'only' left the homes," says Hajaj. "Jews from other countries immigrated with nothing but the clothes they were wearing. My father was one of Libya's biggest billionaires and immigrated with a suitcase weighing 20 kilos."

$4 or 200 billion?

Researchers and organizations are at odds over the scope of the lost property.

Economist Sidney Zabludoff, a former American government worker, estimated that the property totaled some $700 million in the 1950s and reached some $6 billion in 2007. The Pensioner Affairs Ministry puts the sum at about 2 billion pounds. One organization says $30 billion and another says $100 billion in Iraq alone.

Will the Jews be compensated for the looted property? And can it, and should it, be deducted from the property Israel took from the Palestinians?

The scope of the Palestinian property is also a matter of controversy. Economist John Barncastle evaluated the Palestinian property the 1950s at some $450 million. Zabludoff said it stood at some $4 billion today. The Camp David peace talks discussed $20 billion, while Arab organizations spoke of some $200 billion.

The disagreement stems from the reevaluation method. The number of people who escaped on both sides was similar: About 730,000 Palestinians and about 700,000 Jews (excluding those who immigrated to France). Most of them lived in their own homes.

The Jews, in general, were much richer and possessed many assets in addition to the houses. But real estate is the main thing, and it is customary to add to the original value the rising prices in the places the refugees lived in. Israeli housing prices, as we all know, have gone up much more.

Israel earned a lot from the Jewish property looted in Europe and used the funds to help Holocaust survivors, although insufficiently. But until recently, the State ignored the Jewish property in Arab countries.

"Until recently, there was a lot of fear," says Yehuda. "During the peace talks, Egypt's Jews demanded that (then-Israeli Prime Minister) Menachem Begin include a clause requiring compensation, but he wouldn't listen. I think the government was afraid that it would have to pay the Palestinians more.

"They changed their mind when (former US President) Bill Clinton stated that an international fund would be established to compensate both sides. Since then, they are hoping that the arrangement won't be at their expense."

The property in Israel is worth more thanks to the Jews' knowledge and capital. Why should it increase the compensation to the Palestinians?

"These things are not determined according to logic. Here's something even more absurd: Rich Jews from Iraq bought lands in Israel in the 1930s and 1940s before immigrating. Whoever bought lands within the Green Line received them. But some bought lands in Judea and Samaria, and the Jordanians nationalized them.

"After the Six-Day War, the Jews demanded their lands back and the military government said, 'We are acting in accordance to Jordanian law, and therefore they aren't yours.' But settlements of other Jews were established on those same lands."

Americans demanded compensation first

The United States recognized Jews' right for compensation from Arab countries in the 1990s. Former Justice Minister Meir Sheetrit stated in 2006 that Israel would demand compensation.

In 2010, the Knesset enacted the "law for compensating Jewish refugees from Arab countries," which obligates the government to demand compensation as part of any future peace negotiations.

How will Arab countries respond to the Israeli demand? In the past, London-based Arabic-language newspaper al-Sharq al-Awsat quoted an Iraqi lawyer named Hasem Muhammad Ali as saying he supports compensation. But the Iraqi government, according to the newspaper, is against it, claiming that the Jews left out of their own free will and could get their property back if they returned.

The public discourse in Israel focuses on the distress of Oriental Jews. Most books and articles, speeches and protests dealt with the discrimination and injustice they suffered in Israel by the Ashkenazi establishment, and only few dealt with the robbery they suffered in their homelands.

"I think our situation would have been better had we remained in Libya," says Hajaj. "But I don't know if the only one to blame is Israel, which took care of our livelihood and provided education, or the countries which robbed us and sent us away stark naked."

Some 700,000 Jews of Arab countries and 100,000 immigrants from Turkey and Iran were met in Israel by 550,000 Jews who had already settled in, and some 700,000 Holocaust survivors who suffered greatly but received financial compensation and integrated into the Israeli economy.

All three populations have become richer since then, but the gaps between them continue to burden the State to this very day. Israel has regained its title as the center of the Jewish people, but most of the Jewish money has gone to the US, where secure and convenient Jewish life has prospered for the first time in thousands of years.

=======================

Libyan Jews demand compensation / David Regev

Chairman of World Organization of Libyan Jews appeals to Berlusconi, Gaddafi asking for some of funds Tripoli is slated to receive from Rome in compensation for damages of colonialism

Full story