There is no Israeli orator tougher and more pugnacious than Benjamin Netanyahu, but even his allies expressed bewilderment — and shock — Wednesday after the prime minister asserted that a Palestinian religious leader gave Adolf Hitler the idea to annihilate the Jews.
In a speech here Tuesday evening, Netanyahu sought to explain the surge in violence in Israel and the West Bank by reaching for historical antecedents. He said that Jews living in what was then British Palestine faced many attacks in 1920, 1921 and 1929 — all instigated by the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who allied himself with the Nazis during World War II.
Then Netanyahu dropped his bombshell. He said: “Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time; he wanted to expel the Jews. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, ‘If you expel them, they’ll all come here.’ ‘So what should I do with them?’ he asked. He said, ‘Burn them.’ ”
Netanyahu, the son of a historian, said the mufti played “a central role in fomenting the Final Solution,” as the Nazis termed their plan to exterminate the Jews.
Angela Merkel has disputed Netanyahu’s claim and said that Germany was responsible. Merkel manned up. When will Netanyahu stop beating the drums of war?
He apparently wants strife and turmoil in the middle east. Perhaps if it all went away, some of his followers would no longer need him. He really needs to stop with the war mongering.
Conditions are bad enough in Israel without Netanyahu playing on Israeli fears. People are already afraid. The prime minister ought to be toning down the rhetoric and trying to quell fears, rather than exacerbating an already terrifying situation. He ought to be seeking peace, not war, if the region is to ever become a welcoming place to live, where three major world religions live and worship in peace and prosperity.
Shame on Netanyahu.
“He apparently wants strife and turmoil in the middle east.”
Funny….I don’t see him extorting Jews to go out and stab people.
I don’t see him ordering the military to attack anyone.
I don’t see him saying “Death to ……. ”
How much more “peace seeking” to THEY have to do before people demand the same of the Palestinians?
Huh? I believe the military most certainly is attacking people. Now, should they be? I don’t know. I am not entitled to their orders. Perhaps they should be attacking. At this point, perhaps it is appropriate.
Fiery rhetoric stirs people up. Blaming a Palestinian for the Holocaust is ridiculous. We know who was responsible for the Holocaust–ultimately it was Hitler.
Responsible leaders always should seek peace. I believe the Palestinians who are killing Jews need to stop killing Jews. How do you think Netanyahu blaming Palestinians for the Holocaust might help achieve this goal?
What an ignorant and disgusting comment to make.
@Starryflights
Who?
Netanyahu?
How is remarking on history repugnant?
The Grand Mufti WAS an ally of Hitler.
During a joint news briefing with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Wednesday said that national socialists bore full responsibility for the Holocaust.Responding to a reporter’s question about suggestions Netanyahu made a day before that a WWII-era Palestinian religious leader inspired the Holocaust, Merkel said Germany would not change its view of history
http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2015/oct/21/angela-merkel-germany-stands-by-holocaust-responsibility-video
Markel knows the truth
The Holocaust was underway BEFORE their meeting.
Netanyahu knows exactly what he’s doing. Bulldozing homes, expanding settlements, inciting fear and violence- he obviously wants ALL of Palestine.
Yes, Netanyahu does know exactly what he is doing. I find him contemptible.
@Cargosquid
Cargo,
They don’t understand history. If they did, they’d understand why Yugoslavia tried to have the Grand Mufti extradited and tried in that country, for war crimes.
@middleman
“The Holocaust was underway BEFORE their meeting.
1941 was BEFORE the infamous “Final Solution” was issued? Hmmm. I guess the Wannsee Conference in January 1942 where the decision to exterminate, rather than persecute and expel, was just a formality?
Merkel doesn’t have it “right”. Perhaps Netanyahu is taking small liberties with the record, his assertions are supported by history. Considering he is the leader of a nation founded on the premise of “Never Again”…I think he deserves a bit of latitude. Merkel, on the other hand, has thrown open the doors of her nation to “refugees” and will have to face the consequences of her decisions, as will the German people. That Netanyahu wants to protect his nation from similar consequences, is admirable, IMHO.
I believe this issue here is inflammatory rhetoric. Israelis are scared and rightfully so. Do you think that mentioning the Holocaust will lessen their fears? Not all Palestinians want to wage war. A good leader would try to tone things down, rather than ramp it up.
Fewer lives will be lost.
Then there is that rascally problem of who was there first. My friend’s (who is Christian Arab) family had lived in the Jerusalem area for centuries. They were pitched out and had to immigrate themselves.
No one ever wants to talk about those things. Bank accounts were frozen, homes taken over, all the things that would enrage Americans.
Now realistic people say get over it, time to move on. Hell, the Lakota still haven’t gotten to that point. Not sure we should expect Palestinians to do much better.
@middleman
“he obviously wants ALL of Palestine”
Um…I do believe that Israel unilaterally withdrew from the West Bank and Gaza, and said…”You’ve got it. Don’t attack us, and live in peace”. What did this get them? Kasaam Rockets, bus bombings, and civilians getting stabbed with all manor of kitchen implements.
It is Hamas and the PLO, the elected government of the Palestinians who want ALL. Your argument lacks intellectual honesty.
Somewhere in all those political labels are people. Jewish, Palestinian, Christian who probably would love nothing more than peace.
Both sides have not done right. Netanyahu is a war monger, in my opinion. If there would be peace, I doubt if he would know what to do with himself.
@Starryflights
“Markel knows the truth”
Merkel (Angela) knows nothing, as her current policy of immigration demonstrates in stark means.
But Markel (Paul) does know the truth: https://www.studentofthegunradio.com/121/
Merkel was a leader to assume the responsibility of the Holocaust rather than side-stepping it. I don’t know what she knows and what she doesn’t know about immigration. The immigration in question that caused all the furor happened when I was a wee mite. That was done sloppily also.
Why do liberals hate Jews so much?
That is a preposterously stupid statement. Liberals don’t hate Jews. IN fact, many liberals ARE Jews.
You might want to rephrase your question. I think you can do better than that.
@Moon-howler
“Merkel was a leader to assume the responsibility of the Holocaust rather than side-stepping it.”
By presenting an over-simplified version of her own country’s history, she’s a leader? No one, (except perhaps Mahmoud Ahmadinijad) disputes that the Nazis, lead by Hitler, took the centuries long persecution of european jews to an unparalleled level, devising a “final solution” the “Jewish Problem”, she denies that the Nazis had lot’s of help. The 21st Waffen SS Division was made up of muslims from the balkans and mid-east who took special pleasure in killing Jews.
This Grand Mufti of Jerusalem fled to Syria (then a mandate of France, anti-Semitic in their own right) after a failed revolt against the British…in….Palestine. He aided the Germans throughout the war in recruiting Muslims from the Middle-East, the Balkans, and Muslim Soviet Republics.
So what do we know? The “Palestinians” have tried and failed to defeat, the UK, Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon. Each time, their “lot” has gotten worse, welcome-mats rolled up. These people haven’t been able to live at peace with anyone, going back to the Ottoman Empire. They also haven’t learned any lessons from their previous attempts at insurrection. They finally have the West Bank and Gaza given to them, and they still can’t seem to accept peace.
They should look at the lot of another group of Muslims in that area: the Druze. About 130,000 Druze live within Israeli borders. 94% accepted Israeli citizenship and enjoy the full rights and benefits that come with citizenship.
One might say the same thing about the Irish.
I dislike broad-brushing any group of people. I feel certain there were all sorts of people involved with the SS.
Ukrainians were also involved in the HOlocaust. The main culprits were Nazis who were primarily Germans.
More importantly, how is peace served if Netanyahu is still waving the bloody shirt. I simply don’t see how anyone can defend fanning the flames.
Netanyahu is very obvious to most people.
@Moon-howler
“More importantly, how is peace served if Netanyahu is still waving the bloody shirt. I simply don’t see how anyone can defend fanning the flames. Netanyahu is very obvious to most people.”
Moon,
How is Netanyahu fanning the flames, when his people are being stabbed with screwdrivers, knives, vegetable peelers? How is he inciting violence, when were it not for the Iron Dome, the Kasaam Rocket would become the national bird of Israel?
He’s obvious to me: He is a former Israeli Commando, who understands the threat his nation faces, not only from elements on the West Bank and Gaza, but from their patrons, Iran, Syria, and sadly, now Turkey. He understands much better than anyone in our Executive the real threat of ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Quieda, Hezzbolah, and the PLO. He’s an Israeli patriot, who has spent his life defending his nation from threats, and wants to keep his people safe. The last administration unilaterally withdrew from the West Bank and Gaza, evicted many of settlers and dismantled their enclaves. Netanyahu understood this was a bad idea, as the Palestinians would never be satisfied, and he was proven correct.
How is peace served, when the Palestinians won’t allow peace?
Israel is like that scrapper on the playground. Leave him alone, and he’ll leave you alone. Treat him well, he’ll treat you better. Attack him, and he will beat you, because he will not give up. Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, all much bigger, have tried at one time or another to mob-attack Israel, and each was taught painful lessons. All eventually made peace, or went about avoiding Israel. Not the Palestinians. They keep picking fights. Throwing the first punch. Each time losing. Israel finally got tired of it and said, that’s your area, this is ours. Not good enough for the Palestinians.
Has Israel recognized the Palestinian’s right to exist, and handed over the much of the (formerly) Occupied Territories to the PLO/Hamas? Yes.
Has the Palestinian Authority recognized Israel’s right to exist within its current borders? No.
Seems to me, you are chiding the wrong side here.
Actually I am only chiding Netanyahu. A real leader would continually seek solutions for peace rather than fan the flames of fear and malcontent. He is a thrower of the verbal Molokov cocktail, a shock jock, an Israeli Rush Limbaugh. High-ranking German advisors aided and abetted Hitler. Not some little-known Arab whom Hitler would have seen as unworthy anyway.
You are entitled to your opinion, and my opinion is he would be at peace, if there weren’t constant threats from not just the Palestinians, but Iran, Syria, ISIS, and a whole bunch of lesser states and groups that want to do harm to Israel, or have you forgotten about them?
You can be tough without being inflammatory. I have seen Netanyahu go out of his way to “poke the bear” way too many times to admire him as a leader.
I am not sure your point about religions vs nationalities. That is a region of blurred lines with many overlaps.
I feel your statement about the indigenous people of the region is very biased.
The Grand Mufti isn’t some unknown in that region. And while the western work was horrified when the dull extent of Nazi crimes became known, contributing to support for a Jewish state, who has continued to call for finishing what Hitler started? Ba’aath modled itself on the Nazi model. Verbal molotov cocktails offend you? Real ones offend me, and guess who’s throwing them?
Why do idiots love to post on blogs so much?
@Steve Thomas
I think most scholars consider Kristallnacht in 38 to be the start of the Holocaust. The extermination of European Jewry began in 1939 after the invasion of Poland. The meeting with Al-Husseini was in 1941.
@Steve Thomas
Israel has built 245 official and unofficial settlements and permitted 560,000 Jewish citizens to move to East Jerusalem and the West Bank in violation of the Geneva Convention and international law. There is every indication that the pace of illegal settlement is accelerating. Many in Israel have never accepted the idea of two states, including Netanyahu.
THAT’s intellectually honest (and factual), my apologist friend.
On this you would be incorrect, demonstrably so. Persecution of Jews ebbed and flowed throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. Russia had its pogroms under both the Czars and the Bolsheviks. France was almost as bad. Austria. Even Poland Others to a greater or lesser degree.
The “Night of Broken Glass” was the start of state persecution, but this was only a notch above that which the Jews had periodically experienced for over 100 years. This is why so many Jews thought is was just another cycle that would pass. Their rights were restricted, as they had been before. Some were roughed up by brownshirts, terribly so, but they weren’t loaded on trains and taken to labor camps, stripped of their humanity, worked/starved to death, or actually executed. This wouldn’t happen for another year or so.
It was a process, and such is the radical leftist strategy, it is an incremental one. The Jews were “frogs in a pot” who didn’t try to jump out, as they just got used to the “new normal” as it unfolded. It wasn’t until the Warsaw Ghetto uprising that they actually tried to actively resist, but it was too late. The water had begun its rolling boil.
How is that a violation of the Geneva Accords or International Law? The Arabs broke the partition agreement as soon as they invaded Israel in 1948, and lost territory during this and each successive war. Israel should be able to annex this by right, as they weren’t the aggressor.
So, by your rationale, the US is even more guilty, as we won California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada, sent settlers and annexed the territory after a war with Mexico. Should we give it back? How about Puerto Rico, Guam, and Saipan? We took those from Spain. Should we give those back? If Mexico started lobbing rockets into Arizona, would we be violating international law if we responded in our own defense?
You may call me an apologist for Israel. That’s fine. But you ignore the fact that the Palestinians have caused trouble everywhere they’ve lived…in Jordan, Lebanon, The West Bank, Gaza, Cyprus…maybe the problem isn’t Israel. Are you honest enough to admit that the Palestinians aren’t interested in peace? They elect terrorists as their government, for crying out loud.
Those are the facts, my naive friend.
As far as Jerusalem goes, I consider it Israel’s 100%. Paid for by blood, after being attacked. Same with the Golan.
How much does your faith and prophecy have to do with your feelings about Israel?
There are misdeeds on both sides. Displaced people often cause “trouble.” When you don’t belong, that happens.
Some Palestinians are of the mind-set to get what they consider their lands back regardless of cost. This mind-set is not in the best interest of either party. The operative word here is some…not all.
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Begin, for example, is highly regarded in Israel, even though he participated in the bombing of the King David Hotel where many were killed.
Abbas is not a terrorist.
I try to see both sides of a situation. I think overall, I am a better world citizen if I see everyone’s point of view. Both groups have valid points, both groups have made critical mistakes. Until Palestine and Israel settle down, the rest of the middle east has little hope. I seriously doubt if Israel and Palestine will ever be at total peace.
If our country were facing similar threats, say Canada who we’d fought 4 times was funneling Iranian money into northern NY, and Mexico still couldn’t accept the fact they’d lost California and expressed this displeasure by engaging in rocket attacks on El Paso, bus bombings in Reno, and random stabbings in Phoenix, who would you want to lead the country? An ex Navy Seal, or some schmuck from Dartmouth?
@Steve Thomas
Exactly right. Husseini was part of the atrocities in the Balkans.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/202345#.VisTmVe6Rkp
The historian emphasized to Arutz Sheva that there is great importance in noting the part played by the Arab mufti in the Holocaust.
“When Haj Amin al-Husseini met Hitler in November 1941, he told him that there’s a stark similarity between Nazism and Islam,” explained Sharvit. “Husseini was responsible for establishing SS units in the Balkans. He was friendly with senior SS commanders, and was responsible for Berlin Radio broadcasts in all the Islamic lands.”
@Moon-howler
“A real leader would continually seek solutions for peace rather than fan the flames of fear and malcontent.”
Netanyahu is on record for seeking peace talks. All such attempts are rebuffed by the Palestinians. The solution for peace is to defend yourself and defeat those seeking to kill you…to stop those that do not want to negotiate, but merely see you dead.
The Mufti was instrumental is seeking a final solution.
http://www.meforum.org/5574/schwanitz-husaini
In their 2014 book Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East, published by Yale University Press, Schwanitz and co-author Barry Rubin delve into the deep ties between Hitler and the Grand Mufti:
At their meeting [on November 28, 1941, Hitler and al-Husaini] concluded the pact of Jewish genocide in Europe and the Middle East, and immediately afterward, Hitler gave the order to prepare for the Holocaust. The next day invitations went out to thirteen Nazis for the Wannsee Conference to begin organizing the logistics of this mass murder.
The highly acclaimed book also examined the Grand Mufti’s efforts to prevent Europe’s Jews from finding refuge in the land that would become Israel:
And since any European Jews let out of Europe might later go to Palestine, al-Husaini made it clear that if Hitler wanted Muslims and Arabs as allies he must close Europe’s exits to Jews. At the same time, al-Husaini and Arab rulers also told Britain that if it wanted to keep Arabs and Muslims from being enemies, it must close entrance to Palestine to all Jews. By succeeding on both fronts, al-Husaini contributed to the Holocaust doubly, directly, and from the start.
Oh major bullshit. How about instead we talk about the Vatican’s hand in aiding and abetting the Nazis. I can make a strong case. Now from there, do we make a case that the Catholic Church was part of the final solution? Of course not.
Did you know that Charles Lindbergh was very pro-Nazi and also wrote books in defense of Hitler. He is an American. Does that make us all complicit? Perhaps just all aviators are Pro Nazi.
I am moving from thinking that Netanyahu is just an asshole to thinking he is irresponsible and should be sanctioned by the world community.
I really find what you have said to be unacceptable, biased, inciteful and inflammatory. You are broad-brushing an entire group of people.
The point is, why focus on that one individual? How does it further peace, which is what most Israelis want? What purpose is solved by waving the bloody shirt over the Husseine? Answer: none.
The “final solution” began before 1941–long before.
The Palestinians “cause problems” in these neighboring states, Steve, because they are a displaced people who belong in none of those areas, are ethnically and historically distinct from the majority populations, but cannot return to their lands in what is now Israel. Of course, by now, the people who are “displaced” are not really the people who were originally displaced, they are the children and grandchildren of those people and are far more numerous than the 1948 and 1967 Palestinians. But they have a history and culture of grievance, and that’s why pot keeps boiling. It’s an intractable problem.
I would also like to add to what Scout said…many of these people have ancestoral homes dating back centuries that are no longer theirs.
We can all stipulate that Haj Amin Al-Husseini harbored a toxic hatred for Jews. That’s not the issue. The issue raised by the Post is Netanyahu’s suggestion that but for the Grand Mufti’s hostility, the Nazis would have been a less malevolent force in the 1930s and 40s.
The Nazis were playing the Muslim world, not the other way around. Much of the Middle East at the time of the German post-WWI military resurgence was under control of the British and French. German foreign policy (and later military policy) was to to whatever possible to undermine British security and control (to a lesser extent, French), in colonial or quasi-colonial (like the Palestine Mandate), areas. The Grand Mufti was an easy mark.
What Netanyahu is doing is trying to equate or link directly the present difficulties Israel faces with the horrors of the Holocaust through one guy who has been dead for more than half a century. It’s politically driven distortion very much of a piece with a lot of Netanyahu’s rhetoric. In this instance, it has offended a great many Israelis and Jews elsewhere because it trivializes the vast evil of the German Nazi extermination policies. Anti-semitism, like other ethnic and religious prejudices, is an evil of its own, but there are degrees of harm. What has outraged so many about Netanyahu’s remarks (these are not the first) is that his instinct for hyperbole tends to flatten a history whose dark chasms need to be kept very much in the forefront of collective memory. Politicians in other countries do this all the time – it’s not peculiar to Netanyahu. The difference is that he is doing it with historical evil of such enormity that it can cause great offense to those who fought or were victimized by the Nazi crowd and those who are the heirs to those memories.
Jews AND Brits
@Scout
They were displaced from lands in Jordan too. Trans-Jordan, as it was drawn by the League of Nations, was 2/3 Palestinian. They started a civil war, and lost. You start a fight and lose, “displacement” can result.
So where’s the pressure on Jordan? Where’s the excoriation of Hussein? Where’s the condemnation of non-palestinian Arabs who “settled” those lands the Black September supporters forfeited when they tried and failed to take over Jordan?
Where’s the condemnation for the anarchy sown by this group in Lebanon in the 70’s and 80’s, which led to the near-destruction of tjat country?
No, just easier to blame Israel and demand they give, and give, so the rest of the world can feel “righteous”.
The reason why Netanyahu has been repeatedly returned to leadership is each and every time Israel has bowed to international pressure, it has bit them on the ass. They’ve learned from history, a concept obviously foreign to many on this blog.
No one is asking Israel to bow. What many people are asking is for Netanyahu to stop being stupid. He offended many people with the Holocaust remark because, as Scout said, it trivializes an horrific event. Furthermore, It gave the Palestinians a bit boost to be elevated to that much importance.
He is playing on fear. Everyone’s. An effective leader would have stressed the negative behavior NOW that needed to change, not some dead dude from 75 years ago.
They’re still in Jordan, Steve. In huge numbers. The “civil war” you’re referring to was relatively recent was more of a failed coup attempt by Palestinians displaced from Palestine. It didn’t result in Palestinians being evicted from ancestral lands – it resulted in a permanent breach between the Hashemite ruling family and Arafat and his boys. What “pressure” should there be on Jordan that it isn’t already bearing? The country is practically overrun with refugees from Syria, and dating back further, from Palestine. That it survives from day to day under Abdullah (or his father or grandfather) is some kind of small miracle.
Israel can only be “blamed” to the extent of policies that it adopts that threaten its own security in the long run. The situation is a godawful mess, elements of which are of other actors’ making. All the players have been dealt very difficult hands. Israel is the dominant actor with the strongest military and security services in the region. It also has the closest ties to the United States. To the extent you detect “blame”, the “blame” is more properly classified as concern for Israel itself. It has to find a way to thread through a very hazardous landscape that combines living on a small patch of land, much of which used to be the home of the near ancestors of huge numbers of Palestinians who are living in largely horrible conditions and who are out-reproducing the Jewish population of Israel by a good margin. All this in a larger geographic region where there are radically different religious, cultural, political and tribal attitudes from those in Israel. Even without some kind of military conflagration in the region, it will take protracted statesmanship at the genius level from within Israel, but also from Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, the outer Arab powers, and the U.S. to keep Israel simultaneously democratic, theocratic (in the sense of be a “Jewish State”), and secure over the coming decades. That is why there are a lot of responsible, knowledgeable, pro-Israeli people who fear that Netanyahu’s recklessness makes that goal less, rather than more likely.
@Moon-howler
“No one is asking Israel to bow. What many people are asking is for Netanyahu to stop being stupid.”
Are you really attempting to make this argument? Seriously? How many times has Israel been asked to give something up, for a promise of peace? About the only time it worked out for them was the Camp David Accords (Side note; This, IMHO, is something that Carter can point to, and legitimately claim as a success for his admin, against the Iran Hostage Fiasco, and the Invasion of Afghanistan foreign policy failures), and this promise is tenuous do to the current admin’s embracing of the Arab Spring, abandonment of Mubarak etc.
Netanyahu is being stupid? He’s the first native-born Prime Minister of Israel. He’s a veteran of 3 wars (defensive wars) and countless skirmishes. His brother was killed leading the raid on Entebee to rescue both Israeli and American Jews from PLO/Leftist hijackers. I would say he understands the underlying complexities of the threats facing Israel than either you or Scout.
He didn’t trivialize anything. He placed the current threats in a broader historical context, making a pretty clear argument that Palestinian hatred of the Jews didn’t start in 1948. It pre-dates the founding of Israel.
@Scout
“The “civil war” you’re referring to was relatively recent was more of a failed coup attempt by Palestinians displaced from Palestine. It didn’t result in Palestinians being evicted from ancestral lands – it resulted in a permanent breach between the Hashemite ruling family and Arafat and his boys.”
You are wrong. No other way to say it. Factually wrong. A simple look at the before/after maps of the borders is all it takes to demonstrate that you are wrong.
Within whose borders did the “West Bank” reside, in 1948? The UN proposal called for the creation of a “Jewish State” and an “Arab State and an internationally administered Jerusalem. Of the parties, only Israel was content with the Gerrymandered borders as they were drawn, as they had gained much, and lost nothing. Prior to the invasion of Israel by the Arab League, there were clashes between Jews and Palestinians…and it was the Palestinians attempting to drive the Jews from their ancestral lands, not the other way around. The British, then administering the region under UN mandate, were sympathetic to the Jews, for several reasons. First, the Palestinians were seen as the aggressors. Second, this population had revolted in the past. Third, and most important, they understood that this would only further fuel the Zionist movement.
When Israel was granted independence, Palestine was too, and they immediately joined the Arab League in invading Israel. Israel succeeded in defending it’s borders, and repelling the invaders, but did not expand its territory at this time. Immediately following the war, Jordan occupied/annexed the area. It became part of Jordan. This was affirmed by the UN as part of the 1949 Armistice between Israel and Jordan. The West Bank became part of Jordan. The people there were recognized as Jordanian citizens.
Jordan joined in the next invasion attempt in 1967, and lost this area to Israel. It was internationally recognized as theirs to lose.
We’ve already covered Black September, but this was a case of Jordanians (Palestinians) fighting Jordanians. They lost and many left for camps throughout the Arab world, where they often caused problems within their host nations.
They have their state now, which was for the most part what the UN had mandated for them back in 1947. A look at a couple of maps will confirm this. They can’t accept the fact that Israel exists, and they can’t except Israel has physical control of Jerusalem. Got news for you: None of the parties will accept a partitioned Jerusalem. Israel won it in a defensive war. It is theirs.
Over the last 80 years, the Palestinians have made one bad decision after another, and it has hurt their people tremendously. This isn’t the fault of Israel…each time they’ve reacted to an attack.
I have friends who are Palestinian-American Christians. They are wonderful people. One of them once confronted me on my support of Israel. I told him I had studied the history of the region, and had come to the conclusion that the people on the West Bank and Gaza had no one to blame but themselves for their current plight. Never being willing to compromise has cost them greatly. Also, any sympathy I did have vanished on 9/11/2001. Israel wept for America on that day, as they knew all too well what is means to be victims of terror. On the West Bank, the people danced in the street, shouting “Death to America”. Netanyahu, understands this. I understand this. Apparently, you do not.
Of course Palestinian antipathy toward Jewish immigration pre-dates the founding of Israel, Steve. That’s not controversial among even undergrads who have taken an entry level Mideast survey course. Netanyahu had no reason to make that point.
It’s well understood that much of Palestinian animosity toward Zionist movements goes back to the influx of Israeli immigrants in the post-WWI era. You don’t have to look around too hard to see what kind of hostilities can be generated by large influxes of people of alien culture, habits, and religion. I don’t say that to excuse these hatreds. They are usually irrational and are often used by demagogues to achieve other ends. We can see that in this country and in contemporary Europe. But Palestinians in the inter-war period were fearful that Britain was not adequately controlling immigration from Europe and that, if it continued unabated or increased, it would result in the ejection of Palestinians from their lands or, at best, an unwelcome partition which would have the effect of displacing many Palestinians from their homelands. While demagogues like the Grand Mufti and others may have inflamed that issue, their fears weren’t entirely irrational. Look what happened.
Netanyahu wasn’t making an argument that hostility pre-dates Israel. He was trying to link current violence over issues surrounding access to Temple Mount to Nazi extermination policies. It isn’t the first time he has used that kind of rhetoric. It preys on ignorance and fear and does nothing to improve the security position of Israel. But, like a lot politicians who lack true governance skills, Netanyahu knows that there is an element with whom that kind of talk will take root, and that he can possibly wall himself in with sufficient political strength that, when the inevitable bad stuff happens in an environment like the Middle East, he won’t be faulted for not having found creative solutions. He clearly went too far this time. When the Anti-Defamation League calls out a Likud minister, particularly the Prime Minister, and when the German Chancellor says that Netanyahu is unjustifiably letting the Germans off the hook, something’s amiss.
My last comment was directed to Steve’s at #41. I see another comment came in while I was responding.
I agree that the status of Jerusalem is a chronic issue with no obvious solution. Add another one to the pile. The United States does not recognize Jerusalem as the Israeli capital because of the intractability of this issue.
I also agree that Israel gained control of the West Bank in a defensive war. That doesn’t make things particularly easy or better for Israel. But it’s kind of like the problem of the dog that catches a car – now what do you do with it? The reason the US has been a strong supporter of a two-state solution is that offering up something, even if it is just a remnant of the Mandate, to Palestinians is much less of a problem for Israel than would be outright annexation by Israel.
The 1948 UN partition was doomed to be a source of hostilities forever. The British were exhausted and were completely fed up (and chewed up militarily) by both Zionist and Arab zealots. They just wanted to GTF out. The partition was one of these many arbitrary boardroom map-drawing exercises that had no sustaining reality in the hearts and minds of the people most directly affected. I can agree with you that a lot of bad decisions were made in the late 1940s, particularly on the Arab side. You are quite right to say that they paid a price militarily for bad decisions. But I approach this issue from what is happening now. I also approach it as someone who believes the US has to be completely committed to protecting Israel within its borders. However, because Israel occupies that unusual status, Israel has to be committed to appreciating the fact that US interests aren’t identical to Israeli interests and that there are times when the best thing the United States can do for Israel is to speak bluntly about policies and actions the vectors of which lead to a less secure environment for Israel, and by extension the United States.
I say all that with a very strong appreciation for how complex the history and the current mindsets are on the ground. Virtually every issue in the Middle East and every issue related to terrorism that the United States faces today has some link, real or perceived (and the difference is almost immaterial in many cases) to the history of the formation of the modern state of Israel in Palestine.
I couldn’t agree with Scout more! Excellent!
Once again, I feel that those of us who attempt to see “the other side” are castigated and labeled as those who sympathize with stabbing Israelis with vegetable peelers. I absolutely do not. But this entire unsettled mess didn’t start yesterday and it won’t be solved by poking bears with sticks.
The thing is…..the original plan was not the Final Solution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan
The original plan was deportation.
Netanyahu was not letting anyone off the hook.
Scout,
Considering the track record of this administration regarding Libya, Egypt, Syria, is it surprising that Israel would be disinclined to follow the “blunt” talk coming from the White house?
And considering the current state of that region, is it surprising that the Israeli PM is speaking “bluntly” as well? At least with Kaddaffi and Mubarak there was stability and the radicals were kept in check. Same with Assad. Obama’s destructive policy has injected greater instability into that region.
Really, what else should Israel give up?
What Israel needs to give up is fanning the flames. It’s all what the PM said. Nothing more. Israel has every right to defend itself.
The point of the Palestinian music thread was to point out that there were a lot of unemployed young men being stirred up by music. Serious leaders would recognize the dangerous situation and attempt to quell the feelings rather than shock jock them into action.
You could have mentioned Saddam Hussein in your list. That you mention Qadaffi and Assad in the same sweep interests me. I see some real differences in those situations.
I’m not sure that what Netanyahu said was “blunt” as much as it was gratuitously inflammatory and historically inaccurate, at least in the context he was trying to convey. It made him look bad and it didn’t make any point that contributed to the security of Israel.
Given the meanderings and false starts of this Administration in Syria and, to a lesser extent, Libya (Egypt, I think, is a different case so I’m disinclined to lump it in with the other two), there is all the more reason for Israel’s officials to act and speak intelligently and to avoid attempts at low grade rabble rousing. There are some very knowledgeable, very sophisticated, very experienced people in Israel who have a very clear appreciation for the dynamics of the region. Many of them come from the military and the security apparatus. Netanyahu should listen to them more than he does (over the past few months, it is not apparent that he listens to them at all). I view Netanyahu as a kind of Israeli George Wallace.
And I view Netanyahu as a kind of Israeli Winston Churchill, so I guess we’ll just have to disagree and move on.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/22/israel-haters-only-like-the-history-that-suits-them/
The link is irrelevant, because no one in this conversation is an “Israel hater”. The link shows that Hitler and al-Husseini had similar views toward Jews. They both were monsters.
But that was then, this is now. How does this awareness (which knowledgeable people have always had) address the current situation in Israel?
We are lifelong Zionists. We choose to boycott Israel.
We are lifelong Zionists. Like other progressive Jews, our support for Israel has been founded on two convictions: first, that a state was necessary to protect our people from future disaster; and second, that any Jewish state would be democratic, embracing the values of universal human rights that many took as a lesson of the Holocaust. Undemocratic measures undertaken in pursuit of Israel’s survival, such as the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and the denial of basic rights to Palestinians living there, were understood to be temporary.
But we must face reality: The occupation has become permanent. Nearly half a century after the Six-Day War, Israel is settling into the apartheid-like regime against which many of its former leaders warned. The settler population in the West Bank has grown 30-fold, from about 12,000 in 1980 to 389,000 today. The West Bank is increasingly treated as part of Israel, with the green line demarcating the occupied territories erased from many maps. Israeli President Reuven Rivlin declared recently that control over the West Bank is “not a matter of political debate. It is a basic fact of modern Zionism.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-zionist-case-for-boycotting-israel/2015/10/23/ac4dab80-735c-11e5-9cbb-790369643cf9_story.html
Excellent article about the Israeli apartheid regime
That was a timely piece, Starry, that I hope Steve and others will read. It should be read in conjunction with another article in the Outlook section of today’s Post, by Assaf Gavron, a former IDF soldier (as is almost every able-bodied, non-Orthodox male in Israel). He had direct experience on active military duty in the West Bank and writes quite incisively about what the experience does both to soldiers who serve in these roles, but also to the fabric of the society in Israel. He concludes that Israel must end its occupation of the West Bank: “Whatever the consequences are [of withdrawal], they can’t be worse than what we are now grappling with.” And he recounts the increasing polarization, religious and secular, in Israeli society. Put those two articles side-by-side and you have a pretty clear picture of why some of us who consider ourselves strong Israel supporters have little truck with Mr. Netanyahu and his crowd.
@Starryflights
They want to boycott Israeli products. They have a lot of boycotting to do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_inventions_and_discoveries
The couple in the article seem like the typical leftists that dislike Netanyahu and a vigorous defense of Israel. Let them live there for a few years and I bet they change their tune. It’s easy for them to say what they did from the safety of Harvard.
Cargo, plenty of people dislike Netanyahu who believe Israel has a right to defend itself. Most people are not binary thinkers.
Netanyahu always seems to go out of his way to exacerbate things with the Palestinians.
One was from Harvard, one from University of Chicago, Cargo. They are self-professed Zionists. I thought they were advancing a vigorous defense of Israel. Read the Gavron piece in the outlook section. When you put the two article together, you have a very clear picture of the dangers to Israel from the policies of aggressive colonization of the West Bank.
@Scout
When you read them, you have a very clear picture that some people think that the policy is a danger to Israel.
As for the detail that one is from Univ. of Chicago….. so what? Both are ivory towers.
Let’s examine what would happen if Israel gives up control of the West Bank…..like they did with Gaza.
Oh…look…Peace came from HAMAS when Israel forcibly removed their settlers, and GAVE valuable, rich, developed land to HAMAS. Oh…….that didn’t happen? The Palestinians destroyed the farms and orchards and set up rocket launchers? Funny…. The writers don’t seem to remember that bit…..
When the Palestinians start acting like civilized people and act like they respect Isreal’s existence, then the Israelis can withdraw. Meanwhile, the Palestinians keep instigating wars and conflicts and losing…which results in the loss of more land.
Did civilized people respond to the dying immigrant? No they kicked and spat on him.
It’s in Israel’s best interest to rein in that kind of behavior.
The reality is, due to the nature of the geography, Israel will always be in jeopardy. They can’t kill every Palestinian. Perhaps this is the time to start looking for common ground. This isn’t like you are taking the enemy off the battlefield.
There is no such thing as “peace” with the Palestinians as long as they value death over their children. There will be no peace as long as the terrorist group HAMAS values terrorism over the lives of Gazans. There will be no peace as long as Fatah values conflict over negotiations.
Occupied West Bank? The Palestinians think ALL of Israel is occupied territory.
Broad brush again. There are various factions within the Palestian population the same as there are Israelis with different points of view.
There will never be peace if the Israeli leadership continues to poke the bear with a stick. There have been two articles with two different points of view. Cargo, you have ignored them as though the people said nothing. At least disagree with the specifics of someone’s point of view.
Cargo – I’d be more interested if you took the points made by Professors Levitsky and Weyl and refuted them. They say bluntly that, by its settlement policy in the West Bank, “Israel has embarked on a path that threatens its very existence.” Their rationale is that the settlers population in the West Bank has multiplied more than 30 times since 1980 and the Israeli government policy seems to be to increasingly treat these occupied zones as integral parts of Israel. That creates a problem of a permanently subjugated, alienated, and resentful native population that cannot be given full participatory democratic rights for fear that they will outvote Jewish Israelis. They outline impacts this situation has had on the fabric of Israeli society and cite a documentary in which six former directors of Israel’s internal security service, Shin Bet, state that the occupation threatens Israel’s long-term security. While Levitsky and Weyl may be academics, the directors of Shin Bet are not. In the companion article, many of the same points are made by Assaf Gavron, who begins his article with recollections of his military service patrolling Palestinian villages in Gaza. No ivory-tower dreaming there.
When you comment on these articles, take on their content, not the address of the authors. The co-authors of the first article speak as unapologetic Zionists. The author of the second article speaks with the direct experience of military service in the occupied territories.
Professors Levitsky and Weyl – the John Kerrys of Isreal.
@Moon-howler
“There will never be peace if the Israeli leadership continues to poke the bear with a stick.”
And yet…there is no peace when Israel politicians kowtow. See Gaza.
The poking comes from the Palestinians and includes rockets and terrorists.
Cargo, if you are truthful, you will admit that there is continual poking from both sides. To say otherwise is dishonest.
However, as our ally, I expect more from Natanyahu. He keeps this crap up and he needs to be removed by his people. I sure don’t want any more of MY tax dollars, to quote some conservatives, going to someone who is on a mission to stir up violence rather than quelling it.
@Cargosquid
“Oh…look…Peace came from HAMAS when Israel forcibly removed their settlers, and GAVE valuable, rich, developed land to HAMAS. Oh…….that didn’t happen? The Palestinians destroyed the farms and orchards and set up rocket launchers? Funny…. The writers don’t seem to remember that bit…..
When the Palestinians start acting like civilized people and act like they respect Isreal’s existence, then the Israelis can withdraw. Meanwhile, the Palestinians keep instigating wars and conflicts and losing…which results in the loss of more land.”
Couldn’t agree more. A realist would ask, “If so many think Netanyahu such a war-mongering hawk, why do they keep bringing him back with their ballots?
Because he’s been proven right, more than he’s been proven wrong. Each time Israel extends an open hand, they lose a finger. Each time they respond with a fist, they end up larger and more secure. Historical facts are sticky things.
You are obviously missing the point. The point is about rhetoric, not cherry picking historical facts for the occasion.
I suppose we could ask the same question about Obama. Obviously someone likes him.
Sheikh Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, has made the claim that the Al-Aqsa Mosque has never been a Jewish worship site, ignoring Biblical, Historical, and Archaeological evidence to the contrary, not to mention Islamic texts as well.
Now who’s poking the bear with outrageous claims lacking in historical accuracy? Who is attempting to keep all those unemployed and disenfranchised young men stirred up? Who is inciting further violence?
Who cares what he says. Is he the elected leader of Palestine?
He has a slightly different role than Netanyahu.
How about Netanyahu being a man and simply stating that he will not tolerate any more violence and outline a plan for what will happen to those who perpetrate it? Instead he gets down in the sandbox with the rest of the children.
@Steve Thomas
The irony …the sad…sad….irony..is that the two religious narratives are not mutually opposed.
The Temple is holy to Jews. Historical fact.
The Mosque is holy to Muslims because Muhammed is reputed to have ascended to heaven there.
The Quran states that the Muslims and the Jew worship the same God.
So…there actually should be no Muslim antipathy due to religion. They could even rebuild the temple and still have a mosque on site…… because the narrative is merely saying that Muhammed ascended from the Jewish Temple Mount…..
Many Christians aren’t all that nice about Jews either. What does that have to do with stirring the pot?
How about just coming out and saying that you basically dislike Palestinians and be done with it? If they are all the worst humans on earth, it has nothing to do with the fact that our ally, Netanyahu, said some fairly stupid things that would incite rather than quell violence between the two groups.
“The Quran states that the Muslims and the Jew worship the same God.”
Both claim to descend from Abraham too, and if one places any stock in the Genesis narrative, these particular children of Ismael would seem to be fulfilling their prophecy:
Gen. 16:12 “He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.”
@Moon-howler
“Who cares what he says. Is he the elected leader of Palestine?”
The Palestinians aren’t influenced by anyone except the elected leaders from Hamas and the PLO? They don’t listen to the Sheiks, Mullahs, Muftis and the like?
See, this is where the trap into which so many in the west fall. They actually believe these people can form a functioning secular government. They cannot, as Islam is as much a political system, as it is a religious one.
That’s news to me.
I find this Democrat pro-Palestinian debate to be niave at best. There is more – much more – going on here and it centers on, for example, the PA err PLO’s bid to get UNESCO to recognize the Western Wall (the last remaining wall of the Jewish Temple) as a Muslim site and an “integral part of the Al-Aqsa Mosque,” That effort was thwarted at the last moment this time around, but UNESCO did state that the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s tomb are muslim sites and an integral part of Palistine. The PA/PLO is a racist hate group as is the UN. Where was the US on this?
The Palestinian Authority became a full member of UNESCO in October 2014 and immediately made clear that the membership would be used to continue its global political war against Israel that aims to delegitimize the Jewish State. All the Prime Minister is doing is pointing out that that racism is deep and long standing.
The PA uses the automatic Muslim majority in UN organizations to weaken the position of Israel and to get recognition for the (non-existent) “State of Palestine.”
The racism of the arabs is real and is now taking a new and dangerous turn buy legitimizing the rewrite of history in order to make land claims and to prevent jewish worship at their holy sitesl.
I would chose a different word from racism. Think about it. Both are Semitic people.
Why am I being accused of a Democratic Pro- Palestine stance? Please explain.