23 October 2012

Survey: Most Israeli Jews would support apartheid regime in Israel

By Gideon Levy | Oct.23, 2012
It's called co-existence!

Palestinians waiting to cross through the Hawara checkpoint near Nablus. Photo by Nir Kafri
Most of the Jewish public in Israel supports the establishment of an apartheid regime in Israel if it formally annexes the West Bank.
Just change 'Arabs' to 'Jews' and go back 70 years
 A majority also explicitly favors discrimination against the state's Arab citizens, a survey shows.

The survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews. The survey was commissioned by the Yisraela Goldblum Fund and is based on a sample of 503 interviewees.
Like the Hitler Youth - they get 'em young
 The questions were written by a group of academia-based peace and civil rights activists. Dialog is headed by Tel Aviv University Prof. Camil Fuchs.

The majority of the Jewish public, 59 percent, wants preference for Jews over Arabs in admission to jobs in government ministries. Almost half the Jews, 49 percent, want the state to treat Jewish citizens better than Arab ones; 42 percent don't want to live in the same building with Arabs and 42 percent don't want their children in the same class with Arab children.
A right-wing demonstrator holding a sign that reads 'The Land of Israel for the People of Israel' during a protest in 2009. Photo by Emil Salman / Jini
 A third of the Jewish public wants a law barring Israeli Arabs from voting for the Knesset and a large majority of 69 percent objects to giving 2.5 million Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank.
It's another way of saying 'Shalom'
 A sweeping 74 percent majority is in favor of separate roads for Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank. A quarter - 24 percent - believe separate roads are "a good situation" and 50 percent believe they are "a necessary situation."
Almost half - 47 percent - want part of Israel's Arab population to be transferred to the Palestinian Authority and 36 percent support transferring some of the Arab towns from Israel to the PA, in exchange for keeping some of the West Bank settlements.
Although the territories have not been annexed, most of the Jewish public (58 percent ) already believes Israel practices apartheid against Arabs. Only 31 percent think such a system is not in force here. Over a third (38 percent ) of the Jewish public wants Israel to annex the territories with settlements on them, while 48 percent object.
You can't fool an Israeli soldier when it comes to spotting terrorists
 The survey distinguishes among the various communities in Israeli society - secular, observant, religious, ultra-Orthodox and former Soviet immigrants. The ultra-Orthodox, in contrast to those who described themselves as religious or observant, hold the most extreme positions against the Palestinians. An overwhelming majority (83 percent ) of Haredim are in favor of segregated roads and 71 percent are in favor of transfer.

The ultra-Orthodox are also the most anti-Arab group - 70 percent of them support legally barring Israeli Arabs from voting, 82 percent support preferential treatment from the state toward Jews, and 95 percent are in favor of discrimination against Arabs in admission to workplaces.

The group classifying itself as religious is the second most anti-Arab. New immigrants from former Soviet states are closer in their views of the Palestinians to secular Israelis, and are far less radical than the religious and Haredi groups. However, the number of people who answered "don't know" in the "Russian" community was higher than in any other.

The Russians register the highest rate of satisfaction with life in Israel (77 percent ) and the secular Israelis the lowest - only 63 percent. On average, 69 percent of Israelis are satisfied with life in Israel.

Secular Israelis appear to be the least racist - 68 percent of them would not mind having Arab neighbors in their apartment building, 73 percent would not mind Arab students in their children's class and 50 percent believe Arabs should not be discriminated against in admission to workplaces.

The survey indicates that a third to half of Jewish Israelis want to live in a state that practices formal, open discrimination against its Arab citizens. An even larger majority wants to live in an apartheid state if Israel annexes the territories.

The survey conductors say perhaps the term "apartheid" was not clear enough to some interviewees. However, the interviewees did not object strongly to describing Israel's character as "apartheid" already today, without annexing the territories. Only 31 percent objected to calling Israel an "apartheid state" and said "there's no apartheid at all."

In contrast, 39 percent believe apartheid is practiced "in a few fields"; 19 percent believe "there's apartheid in many fields" and 11 percent do not know.

The "Russians," as the survey calls them, display the most objection to classifying their new country as an apartheid state. A third of them - 35 percent - believe Israel practices no apartheid at all, compared to 28 percent of the secular and ultra-Orthodox communities, 27 percent of the religious and 30 percent of the observant Jews who hold that view. Altogether, 58 percent of all the groups believe Israel practices apartheid "in a few fields" or "in many fields," while 11 percent don't know.

Finally, the interviewees were asked whether "a famous American author [who] is boycotting Israel, claiming it practices apartheid" should be boycotted or invited to Israel. About half (48 percent ) said she should be invited to Israel, 28 percent suggest no response and only 15 percent call to boycott her.
We're racists, the Israelis are saying, we practice apartheid and we even want to live in an apartheid state. Yes, this is Israel.
By Gideon Levy | Oct.23, 2012 

Arab Israeli activists protest an upcoming wine festival to be held in the courtyard of Be'er Sheva's oldest mosque. Photo by Eliyahu Hershkovitz

As elections draw near, the season of public opinion surveys is upon us. But here is a survey that is more disturbing and significant in its revelations than those informing us whether Yair Lapid is taking off or Ehud Barak is crashing in the polls.

This one lays bare an image of Israeli society, and the picture is a very, very sick one. Now it is not just critics at home and abroad, but Israelis themselves who are openly, shamelessly, and guiltlessly defining themselves as nationalistic racists.
We're racists, the Israelis are saying, we practice apartheid and we even want to live in an apartheid state. Yes, this is Israel.

Among its terrifying results, the survey discovers a certain innocent candor. The Israelis admit this is what they are and they're not ashamed of it. Such surveys have been held before, but Israelis have never appeared so pleased with themselves, even when they admit their racism. Most of them think Israel is a good place to live in and most of them think this is a racist state.

It's good to live in this country, most Israelis say, not despite its racism, but perhaps because of it. If such a survey were released about the attitude to Jews in a European state, Israel would have raised hell. When it comes to us, the rules don't apply.
The "Jewish" part of "Jewish democracy" has won big time. The "Jewish" gave "democracy" a knockout, smashing it to the canvas. Israelis want more and more Jewish and less and less democracy. From now on don't say Jewish democracy. There's no such thing, of course. There cannot be. From now on say Jewish state, only Jewish, for Jews alone. Democracy - sure, why not. But for Jews only.

Because that's what the majority wants. Because that's how the majority defines its state. The majority doesn't want Arabs to vote for the Knesset, Arab neighbors at home or Arab students at school. Let our camp be pure - as clean of Arabs as possible and perhaps even more so.

The majority wants segregated roads in the West Bank and does not flinch in the face of the implications. Even the historic connotation does not bother it in the slightest. It wants discrimination in the workplace and it wants transfer. Enough with the whitewashing and pretense. This is what we want. Because that's the way we are.
The right will probably attack the New Israel Fund for commissioning the survey. Gevalt! It will screech. Leftists, Israel-haters. But the right's hollering will not change the result. This was done by a reliable, well-known polling firm. Besides, what's wrong with the survey? What didn't we know before, apart from the loss of shame? Let the right prove that this is not the way we are, that most Israelis want to live with Arabs. That most of them see Arabs as people like themselves, their equals in rights and opportunities. Let's see them prove it wrong. That would be a true cause for celebration.

The survey does not only confront Israelis with their present, but with their future as well. This appears to be the survey conductors' main goal. It tells them: You wanted settlements, you wanted occupation, you want Netanyahu and you've done nothing for the two-state solution, and it's died. Now let's see what's the alternative.

The alternative, as every infant knows, is one state. One state? Most Israelis say it will be an apartheid state, yet are doing nothing to prevent it. Some of them even want it. They don't even ask, Where are we going? Where are we being led? What's the vision for the next 10, 20 years? Well, if all goes well, if all continues they way it is now, the Israelis know the answer and it's a bitter one indeed.

Until then, the image of Israel 2012 is this: We don't want Arabs, don't want Palestinians, don't want equality, and the hell with all the rest.

Values-shmalues, morals-shmorals. Democracy and international law - those are matters for anti-Semites, not us. We will vote for Netanyahu again, recite that we're the only-democracy-in-the-Middle-East and wail that the whole world is against us.


  1. The Fund's response on the survey published this morning (23:10:12) Ha'aretz 10/23/2012
    New Israel Fund seeks to clarify the "Dialog On" is an independent organization, which operates in accordance with the decisions of the authorities and regulations, and unlike the Post this morning (Tuesday, October 23, 2012) in Haaretz, it does not belong to NIF. Association number of joint projects with various organizations including the New Israel Fund. NIF clarifies that she does not stand behind the survey, published Wednesday in the Haaretz and it is not related to him in any way.

  2. Most Israelis don't want to annex the West Bank, in no small part precisely because they don't want to give them the vote.

    If you ask a hypothetical question, 'But if Israel would annex the West Bank, would you feel better about giving them the vote then?', of course the answer will be 'No!'

    Not having to give WBers the vote is a main reason why Israelis don't want to annex the WB in the first place!

    Likewise, asking if Israeli Jews would rather Israeli Arabs become Palestinian citizens is not the same as demanding they be stripped of their citizenship.

    As for preference for Jews, well, I think it understandable that Israeli Jews want most of their civil servants to be Jews. It is a Jewish state, after all, established as an act of Affirmative Action for the Jewish people.

    Affirmative Action is a kind of discrimination on behalf of an historically disadvantaged group.

    Now, that may be problematical, and more needs to be done to create a society which is more inclusive towards Israeli Arabs. Unfortunately Palestinian Arab nationalism is on the rise among Israeli Arabs, and this is likely to have the opposite effect.

    The global BDS movement is, basically, a pro-Palestinian Arab Muslim and Christian, but anti-Jewish, nationalist movement, and may only exacerbate the problem all the more.

  3. Sorry, posted under the wrong title originally:

    If the choice (and there is no other) is between apartheid and being ruled by the totalitarian Islamists of Hamas (sharia law & all) who hate your guts and want you dead, what would you choose as an Israeli Jew? Do you go with 'apartheid' or allow yourself and your family to be butchered, forcefully converted to Islam, and/or expelled from the land? As an Israeli Jew, do you deny and ignore the content of all those MEMRI and PMW videos of Hamas incitement to murder Jews....just so that you won't later be accused of supporting racism and apartheid? Curious minds would like to know.

  4. Conchovor:

    By your reasoning any opposition to Israeli foreign policy would be ‘anti-Jewish’. That would make Israel the only country in the world that cannot be criticised for such policies, as such criticism would always be racist..

    Affirmative action? Even if that were true it’s not something that can be maintained for ever. Today Jews worldwide are not a disadvantaged group anymore.

  5. To a Jew:

    It is a false choice. Hamas is many things but they are not the Islamists who want you all dead, anymore than the Blacks in Africa were savages who wanted all whites dead.

    Yes the same stereotypes were as predominant then as now.

    Apart from the fact that Palestinians voted Hamas because there was no alternative between them and a quisling Fateh. In a secular democratic state there would be genuine leftist parties. In fact Hamas are less oppressive than Lieberman & co. who u seem to be quite happy with!

    I note that Noam Chomsky has just spoken in support of a 2 state solution in the heart of Gaza, so this primeval idea that they are all savages should be dispensed with. There are salafists who are of this type and Israel's policy is strengthening them (which Zionism is quite happy to do, just as its own Salafists are growing stronger and more importantly have the weaponry to achieve it).

    But what you are doing is rationalising the argument that apartheid is the way to go.

    If I were u, yes I would ignore Memri, since fabrication is their name.

  6. A Jew:

    ”Do you go with 'apartheid' or allow yourself and your family to be butchered, forcefully converted to Islam, and/or expelled from the land?”

    Who exactly in the I/P conflict is being ‘expelled from the land’? Zionist Jews?

    And when the colonisation of ‘Judea and Samaria’ began in the early 70s, do you believe that the purpose was to prevent ‘Jews from being butchered’?

    And if these ‘savages’ are all out to ‘butcher’ you, isn’t your beloved G’ment putting its own people at risk in those areas?

  7. Tony,

    I'll assume you just don't what Hamas and Fatah have been threatening to do to Jews for decades now.


    What do you with that information other than deny, minimize, or ignore it? You do, after all, support "resistance" against the Jews - do you not? That's what all those videos are calls for.

  8. I see Israel has just gone and bombed Sudan. Probably killed more people than a video.

    What I do know is that 69% of Israeli Jews support Apartheid and that is real and then you go blaming the victims for not being politically correct!

  9. Tony,
    The point is, it's hard blaming Jews for not wishing to live under Hamas rule. It would be like Jews from 70 years ago willing to allow the Nazis to come into power in Israel, take over, and do as they will. Would you blame the Jews of apartheid 70 years ago for not allowing the Nazis to rule over them in Israel? Yes or No?

  10. Can't you find a name, even a penname rather than 'a Jew' - do you have to define yourself solely by religion/nationality. In this country, someone defining themselves as 'a Briton' usually comes from a racist direction. It's a giveaway.

    You ask all the wrong questions and draw all the wrong conclusions.

    There is NO comparison between Hamas and the Nazis. The Nazis were the strongest military and industrial power in Europe. Hamas represent the weakest of the weak. Their politics are no worse and indeed a lot better than say that of the Revisionist Zionists of Jabotinsky and Begin who did ally with fascists and Nazis. Their forces even trained at Mussolini's naval base at Civitavechia.

    If the UK had been under occupation for 40+ years then Hamas would be like a children's tea party in comparison to what would arise. And if Hamas, which is supported by a minority of Palestinians, were so bad, then why did Israel lend it critical help at its formation in order to counter secular Palestinian nationalism. Fact is that Israeli leaders love Hamas because it is easy to caricature. In fact they are pretty moderate bourgeois Islam, like the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt. They have targetted those who are fundamentalist sectarians - the Salafists.

    You ask a silly question. Opposing fascism or neo-Nazis is a political decision. It is not discrimination on the basis of ethnicity or racial criteria. Ipso facto it can't be apartheid. It is political discrimination, although you forget that the group that former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir belonged to did offer a military pact to the Nazis!

  11. "It is a Jewish state, after all, established as an act of Affirmative Action for the Jewish people.

    Affirmative Action is a kind of discrimination on behalf of an historically disadvantaged group."

    That is a ridiculous and stupid lie. "Affirmative Action" was a US Government program designed to make hiring more fair and ameliorate past discrimination. It has nothing, nothing at all to do with Zionism or Israel, and I resent your attempt to tar a well-intentioned US program to be tarred with the brush of Zionism.

  12. Greenstein is such a hardened Soviet-style Communist bigot, he will jump at any old rubbish that shows Israel in a negative light


    Jonathan Hoffman

  13. Ah the infamous Jonathan Hoffman. He can't decide whether I'm an old-style Soviet communist or Trotskyist, but given his chants the other week of 'communists out of Brighton' I guess we can accurately call him a McCarthyist.

    The opinion poll cited is in line with all previous polls of this nature, so maybe Jonathan can inform us just what it is he rejects about it (other than the truth!)

    Of course JH is all in favour of the Jewish Natonal Fund, which doesn't lease or rent land or property to Arabs so clearly he has no problem with the principle of Apartheid, just with letting news of it seep into the public domain.

    And since JH campaigned to have people like myself have their blogging rights removed on the Jewish Chronicle, it would appear that I am extremely tolerant in letting him post here since I can't do it for his posts!!

  14. I should add that the article that Hoffperson links to is a good example of Zionist nitpicking at its worst (or best?)

    Apparently Gideon Levy states that a majority of Israeli Jews don't want an Arab neighbour whereas in fact 53% will put up with one! Ok but even if that is true it means 47% are opposed or are too dumb to answer the question.

    And so it goes on. 'only' 33% of Jews want to remove Arab voting rights and although 50% support Jewish only roads in the West Bank it is only because they can't think of any alternative!

    Pathetic JH, even by ur own standards.

  15. As always Greenstein's hate for Israel dominates his intellectual faculties. Even Jodi Rudoren of the New York Times - not known to be supportive of Israel - correctly called this poll a 'push poll' - in other words one where the questions are framed to get the answers that those who commission the poll seek. Greenstein dresses up his hate for Israel in a veneer of intellectual respectability but don't be fooled - he's venomous.

    "And since JH campaigned to have people like myself have their blogging rights removed on the Jewish Chronicle"

    Evidence? I support your right to free speech so the world can see the depth of your Israel hate. You even try to argue that Zionists provided support for Hitler. You'd rather that German Zionists had perished in Germany. Despicable. But great that you have the freedom to be seen for what you are.


  16. As you wrote on my blog, you have no hesitation in lying Hoffman so the removal of my blogging rights to the JC is not something I'll take your word on, especially since you were asking why 'enemies of Israel' etc. should be allowed to post there.

    You have also tried to have even liberal Zionists sacked from communal organisations but I'm not wasting my time researching your habit of trying to bar others from speaking out.

    The poll in questioin is very fair and the answers it gave would give anyone with a modicum of intelligence pause for thought. As someone who welcomed the fascist Lieberman to town and who no doubt welcomes the link-up with Likud, I will not take your protestations seriously.

    The fact that 59% want preference for Jews when it comes to jobs says it all. That is higher by far than the level of racism in Nazi Germany.

    There is no doubt that the Zionist movement worked with and collaborated with the Nazis. That's a matter of fact. It is despicable that you allege that I would welcome the death of any Jew, Zionist or otherwise at the hands of Hitler.

    What you mean, I assume is that the Zionist preference to save Zionists above all other Jews, which resulted in the calamity in Hungary where Kastner of the Jewish Agency sought to save the Zionist and bourgeois elite at the expense of 1/2 million other Jews was unacceptable. And that Havarah, the trading agreement with the Nazis that the Zionists concluded, which resulted in destroying the international boycott of Nazi Germany, was an example of collaboration.

    But since you wish me to give you some examples I am happy to give them of collaboration between Zionism and the Nazis:

    Tom Segev, a Zionist, writes in his book The 7th Million p. 81-2) that Ben Gurion saw the final solution as a 'natural disaster'. 'since members of the party had no control over what was happening in Europe, there was no point wasting words on the moral aspects of recent developments... The second war should end by giving them their own state. That, according to Ben Gurion, was the 'political compass' that would guide the Zionist movement during the war. The movement's position has left a legacy of doubts and paradoxes, ambivalence, and, above all, nagging question.'

  17. Segev descibes how the Jewish Agency's role was to save Jews in Palestine not elsewhere.

    Or take Ben Gurion's biographer, Shabtai Teveth, who is more of a hagiographer. Even he writes that

    'If there was a line in Ben Gurion's mind between the beneficial disaster and an all-destroying catastrophe, it must have been a very fine one.'

    On 21st June 1933, the Zionist Federation of Germany sent a memo to Hitler which explained that of all the Jewish organisations, only the Zionists were ideologically sympathetic to the Nazis:
    On the foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race... fruitful activity for the fatherland is possible. Our acknowledgement of Jewish nationality provides for a clear and sincere relationship to the German people and its national and racial realities. Precisely because we don’t wish to falsify these fundamentals, because we too are against mixed marriages and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group…. The realisation of Zionism could only be hurt by resentment of Jews abroad against the German development. Boycott propaganda… is in essence fundamentally unZionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle but to convince and to build.

    Ben-Gurion at the Zionist Executive Committee of 15.10.42. outlined Zionist’s most immediate tasks: i. Opposition to the British government White Paper ii. Establishment of a Jewish army iii. Establishment of Palestine as a Jewish Commonwealth after the war as part of the solution to the Jewish plight in that period. ‘About rescue – not a word.’ I quote another Zionist S.B. Beit Zvi, 'Zionist in the Crucible of the Holocaust' p. 112

    A particularly appalling example of how the Zionist movement consciously obstructed and vetoed rescue attempts, which had anywhere but Palestine as their destination, occurred in Britain in 1942-3. The Times of 6th June, 1961 printed a letter from Rabbi Dr. Solomon Schonfeld, who was Chairman of the Rescue Committee of the Chief Rabbi of Britain,, describing what happened:

    "My experience in 1942-43 was wholly in favor of British readiness to help, openly, constructively and totally, and that this readiness met with opposition from Zionist leaders who insisted on rescue to Palestine as the only acceptable form of help.

    "In December of 1942... we in London formed a Council for Rescue from the Nazi Terror which, in turn, initiated a Parliamentary Rescue Committee under the chairmanship of Professor A .V. Hill, M.P., supported by leading members of both Houses. At the time I was executive director of the Chief Rabbi's Religious Emergency Council and applied myself to this task. A motion was placed on the Order Paper in the following terms:

  18. "... this House asks H.M. Government... to declare its readiness to find temporary refuge in its own territories or in territories under its control for endangered persons who are able to leave those countries... and to invite the other Allied governments to consider similar action.

    "... this motion achieved within two weeks a total of 277 Parliamentary signatures of all parties. This purely humanitarian proposal met with sympathy from government circles, and I should add that H.M. Government did, in fact, issue some hundreds of Mauritius and other immigration permits indeed, in favor of any threatened Jewish family whom we could name. Already while the Parliamentary motion was gathering momentum, voices of dissent were heard from Zionist quarters: "Why not Palestine?" ....

    "At the Parliamentary meeting held on January 27, 1943, when the next steps were being energetically pursued by over 100 M.P.s and Lords, a spokesman for the Zionists announced that the Jews would oppose the motion on the grounds of its omitting to refer to Palestine. Some voices were raised in support of the Zionist view, there was considerable debate, and thereafter the motion was dead. Even the promoters exclaimed in desperation: If the Jews cannot agree among themselves, how can we help?

    "It was useless to argue with a then current Zionist argument: 'Every nation has had its dead in the fight for its homeland the sufferers under Hitler are our dead in our fight'.

    It is quite clear what the record of the Zionist movement against Hitler was - one of collaboration. And that comes from Zionists not anti-Zionists.

  19. Greenstein says "The fact that 59% want preference for Jews when it comes to jobs says it all." Like Gideon Levy he's twisting the poll. (No surprise). It said that 59% approve of hiring only Jews for GOVERNMENT jobs. Given the security issues surrounding a small minority of Israeli Arabs, that is really hardly surprising. JH

  20. So Hoffman agrees that Israeli Arabs, as a group, should be barred from GOVERNMENT jobs, which in Israel is quite a few. And therein lies the foundation stone of all the other discrimination - on security grounds of course.

    I seem to remember that Hitler justified wiping out the Jews of the Eastern territories and the deportations on 'security grounds' too. Clearly Hoffman has learnt well from his master.

    And when Israeli Railways imposed a condition of having done army service for employees, in order to sack Arab workers who don't do national service, that also was on security grounds? Methinks we should be told.

  21. Tony,

    As anyone can see in Hamas' charter or videos at PMW and MEMRI, they are theocratic fascists who want Jews dead. You support them. Why not just admit it? This is why they're merely "moderate" to you and Zionists are the real Nazis. You support Hamas terror attacks against Jewish civilians. This is legitimate resistance in your view. I wish you were honest enough to just admit it.

  22. Like most colonists you label the indigenous as savages or 'nazi' without understanding anything about the Nazis. They want Jews dead, so much so they invite them to Gaza. They despite their political backwardness are far more advanced than a hasbarist like yourself.

    That is amply demonstrated in the fact that you speak of 'Hamas terror attacks' but never the merciless bombing of Gaza or the continual attacks on peaceful demonstrators in the West Bank or the shackling of Palestinian children.

    If anyone is the Nazi mate it is you but you can't see the beam in your own eye for the mote in someone else's. Fact is that about 8,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza to about 30 Israelis by these so-called terror attacks. But Israel's attacks aren't terroristic at all. Nor was the bombing of UNWRA schools with white phosphorous which Israels's defence ministry now accepts weren't launching bases for 'rockets'.

    State terror is the issue and your frothing reminds me of when the British frothed about the Mau Mau in Kenya. The colonist's religion may change but his mentality doesn't.

  23. You're to hard on the old Zios, Tony. Don't you know bleating on about 'de Gamas' is all they've got left? ;-)

  24. Tony,
    Do you support Hamas rockets and suicide bombs against their intended Israeli targets (the Jews Hamas says they want dead in all those PMW & MEMRI videos)? I'll remind you that many UNGAR's call legitimize resistance via "armed struggle". Do you support this? Here are dozens of examples of this rhetoric followed by deliberate attempts to kill Jews: http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=427 No deflections please. Just a yes or no. Thank you.

  25. I support the right of all oppressed peoples to fight back against their oppressors. What ware Hamas's rockets against Israel's state of the art technology?

    The religion of the oppressor is irrelevant. It only matters to you as a badge of pride. We know how you Zionists behaved when there were real anti-Semites about like those Nazis you like quoting. You collaborated with them.

    Know nothing about this? Maybe I should do a few blog posts to remind you.

    Yes I do support the armed struggle against states like Israel. It is the inalienable right of every oppressed people to fight back. I seem to recall that Marek Edelman, the last Commander of the Jewish FIghting Organisation in the Warsaw Ghetto, also addressed the Palestinian fighters as the Palestinian Resistance.

    You Zionists didn't like it then but that's too bad. Most people can c u for what u r even if you are incapable of looking in the mirror.

  26. So to be clear Tony, if a rocket blows a kindergarten up, that is legitimated armed struggle in your view? Hamas certainly believes it is & they pass out candies to the kids while cheerleading the rocketeers. You support this, I assume? Because if not, I certainly do not see that this appalls you in any way.

    As to Hamas' Jewish targets. You'll find from this link http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=427 that it really is a religious war to Hamas. Maybe you think they're stupid or they lie, but that's how they see it. But apparently, you still support this "right" of theirs, correct?

    Yes or No?

  27. I know English is probably not your first language but you must try to first understand what you read.

    I am opposed to targetting civilians and obviously that includes a kindergarten.

    But tell me, do you condemn the 400 Palestinian children who were murdered in Operation Cast Lead, the use of white phosphorous against an UNWRA school and all the other attacks on civilians? If not you are a racist who can only see the response but never the cause.

    Yes to Hamas and many others it's a religious war. You have succeeded in convincing all too many, but that doesn't alter the fact that it isn't a religious war. It's a war of colonialism, and you are the colonist. YOu wanted to sectarianise and confessionalise the conflict, hence why you helped create Hamas in the 1980's as a counterweight to secular Palestinian nationalism.

  28. If there's one thing I can't stand it is people who don't read what you write and continue regardless. It is called a dialogue of the deaf and 'Jewish guy' (no name, he just defines himself racially) does exactly that.

    He asks me why 'If you are opposed to targeting civilians (jewish children in daycares or kindergartens) then you wouldn't have approved of the following: http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2012/07/israeli-ex-soldier-i-support.html'

    Apparently I am contradicting myself, but this is an ex-Israeli soldier saying that Palestinian victims of Israeli violence have the right to defend themselves.

    Perhaps the idiot that goes by the name of 'Jewish guy' has never heard of the Jewish Resistance of the Warsaw Ghetto - were they anti-German by any chance?

    There is no contradiction as he believes. He is just another colonist trying to justify a monopoly of violence using 'anti-Semitism' as the ruse. It doesn't work any longer. There is nothing Nazi about defending yourself against Israeli soldiers armed to the teeth.


Please submit your comments below