Zionism is bullshit. Three thousand years ago my Celtic ancestors were casting sacred swords into the lakes of Switzerland. Can I go back and claim Switzerland? No. Of course not. It’s nonsense.
I am rather proud of that critique, which still seems to me a short and elegant refutation of the basis of Zionism. I have never seen it answered with anything approaching intellectual success. I am especially proud as it came to me in a moment of inspiration, in the final 12 seconds of an allocated three minute speech to a crowd that stretched further than I could see.
A Ghanaian came up to me in an Accra hotel yesterday and said “Craig Murray. Zionism is bullshit. I miss London.” He then dashed off. It reminded me what a small and interconnected world we live in, as well as leading me to dig out the reference.
I have another motive in posting it. This blog now has a much larger regular readership than it did a few years ago. In particular, following the referendum campaign, it has a much larger readership in Scotland. Since I returned to Scotland to campaign in the referendum and then decided to stay until we achieve independence, which I am determined will be before I kick the bucket, a number of voices have been raised to query who I am and where I come from, in the wider sense of the latter. Sometimes those voices have been hostile or suspicious. I shall therefore give the odd riffle through the back catalogue. You could of course buy my autobiography Murder in Samarkand, thus helping us to eat.
Fedup, RTFC; Mary made it personal, against Habbabkuk and Suhayl, when she posted:
I don’t see that it says anything and if it does it wouldn’t be anything helpful. I’m trying to make Mary think about where such an attitude would ultimately lead to. I’m not convinced that Habbabkuk is a “Zionist supporter” because he has spoken for a one-state solution on this thread, and because of an interesting exchange at squonk.tk last year, Mary unfortunately concluding as follows:
From the following link to the end of the page:
https://squonk.tk/blog/2015/03/15/the-general-discussion-thread/comment-page-24/#comment-9118
But we’re discussing a conflict here. Without forgiveness, by all parties, conflicts can only be ended by total annihilation of one of the parties. That seems a bad outcome, whichever way it plays out.
Amira Hass, an Israeli journalist who understands why the Occupation needs to end:
“I’m fed up with the failed efforts at competing with the abundance of orchestrated commentaries on Hamas’ goals and actions, from people who write as if they’ve sat down with Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh, and not just some IDF or Shin Bet security service source. Those who rejected Fatah and Yasser Arafat’s peace proposal for two states have now been given Haniyeh, Hamas and BDS. Those who turned Gaza into an internment and punishment camp for 1.8 million human beings should not be surprised that they tunnel underneath the earth. Those who sow strangling, siege and isolation reap rocket fire. Those who have, for 47 years, indiscriminately crossed the Green Line, expropriating land and constantly harming civilians in raids, shootings and settlements – what right do they have to roll their eyes and speak of Palestinian terror against civilians?
Hamas is cruelly and frighteningly destroying the traditional double standards mentality that Israel is a master at. All of those brilliant intelligence and Shin Bet brains really don’t understand that we ourselves have created the perfect recipe for our very own version of Somalia? You want to prevent escalation? Now is the time: Open up the Gaza Strip, let the people return to the world, the West Bank, and to their families and families in Israel. Let them breathe, and they will find out that life is more beautiful than death.” [Amira Haas, from article below, 2014]
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.606231
The Journal of Palestine Studies and its website are well worth a read. They have a most interesting and informative blog:
http://blog.palestine-studies.org/
Here is the narrative of a doctor and writer living in Galilee:
“What has really renewed the connection, at least for me, with quite a few other Palestinian intellectuals and activists is the new vision after the death of the two-state solution that has been bandied around for so many years. Among Palestinian intellectuals and activist and among some good number of Israeli leftist activists as well, there’s now a very widely accepted alternative to that: it speaks of one-state west of the Jordan river for all those who live there on equal grounds. It has multiple other layers – the return of refugees or the refugees getting their rightful rights – but the essence is a vision of a united democratic and secular state, both Jewish and Palestinian. And that vision has brought me, personally, in contact with quite a few other Palestinian activists.
I’m very proud of that and I’m very hopeful, especially since there is an equivalent number of Jewish intellectuals and activists who subscribe to that vision.” [quote from Dr Hatim Kanaaneh]
http://blog.palestine-studies.org/2015/06/25/chief-complaint-a-palestinian-doctor-in-the-galilee/
Suhayl; Do you see a ray of sunshine coming out of the ICC re; palestinians.
I’ve been a skeptic about the effectiveness of a consensus bureaucracy for a long time but it seemed for a few months at least, that Abbas had enough confidence in their follow-through to take steps they recommended. Then nothing; nada.
How can anyone have confidence that ICC is any more than a gelding.
Edward Said is quite relevant here:
“As Said wrote, “There is an unmistakable coincidence between the experiences of Arab Palestinians at the hands of Zionism and the experiences of those black, yellow, and brown people who were described as inferior and subhuman by nineteenth-century imperialists.” If Zionist critics tried to disavow the imperial legacies of Zionism, many Palestinians thought that Said had conceded too much. In effect, “Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims” considered the fact that the Palestinians, as “the victims of victims,” have become a crucial part of Zionism’s history. Said argued that they must be acknowledged within this history just as no Palestinian can ignore Zionism.”
There is certainly much value in understanding Zionism in terms of Imperialism. Not least in avoiding what can often be quite a minefield, discursively.
“Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims (1979)”
http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~ikalmar/illustex/said%20zionism.htm
Orientalism and Culture and Imperialism well worth a read.
Yes, definitely, Herbie, Edward Said is crucial, thanks.
“Overwhlemingly, Palestinians want a solution that delivers self-determination, land and human rights. This would be a political solution. They are not interested in self-aggrandising ideological posturing, or apocalyptic pronouncements, from self-righteous people in the West, neither of which has ever done them one iota of good.”
Self-determination, land and human rights is predicated on justice for the oppressed Palestinian’s. In turn, the said justice is premised on the inalienable right of the Palestinian’s to return to land that comprised 531 towns and villages from which they were ethnically cleansed.
The return of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees would result in an irreversible shifting of the demographic composition of the Jewish state and therefore by extension its Jewish extremist supremacist nature that currently privileges the rights of its Jewish citizens over and above that of its Arab counterparts.
Under such circumstances the concept of a two state solution seems to me to be not only moot but totally unrealistic given that the Knesset includes 107 members belonging to Jewish parties, 78 of whom oppose the two-state solution:
http://972mag.com/its-time-for-a-one-state-solution/104766/
The only long-term outcome worth its salt is the establishment of a fully secular and democratic single state in which equal treatment is provided to all.
I guess, Daniel, wrt the right of return, there would have to be negotiations and the offer of compensation in lieu of return and so on (many Palestinians, most of them born after 1948, living and working in other countries around the world would not want to ‘return’). I agree the ideal solution would be a single secular and democratic state. But even a two-state solution would be better than the current situation.
Clark
11 Jul, 2015 @ 12h15
” Mary, again, Iam the enemy. Destroy me and all the world’s problems will be resolved. ”
Clark, greetings.
Am taking that as its profound meaning. That is the elimination, dissolution, disengagement, whatever of the ego. If so, very well observed and said, albeit the word destroy a bit strong. I like the word re-solved there though, truer than solved. Original state.
__________________
Clark:
“Mary made it personal, against Habbabkuk and Suhayl, when she posted:
“Suhayl being supported by a Zionist supporter says it all” ”
Mary is what Mary does. Hardened, embattled, brittle. I’m afraid we all are what we do. But if you keep chewing the same cud, you are bound to get exhausted. No?
Suhayl
From Mary :”Suhayl being supported by a Zionist supporter says it all.”
and
the lack of a reply to your question to Fedup: “Do you support the creation of a Palestinian state (either a one or two-state solution)?”
____________________
It has been agreeable to exchange thoughts with you on this thread but the time has probably come to move on. I do hope, however, that we shall continue to do so on other subjects on other threads.
I shall sign off by wondering aloud whether the discussion on this thread has led you to reach any conclusions about the mindset, knowledge and honesty of many of the commenters who have spoken.
I have, in my header, provided a couple of elements which might be helpful.
Suhayl: “Do you support the creation of a Palestinian state (either a one or two-state solution)?”
Yes – absolutely. I’m surprised that Fedup (usually a fairly articulate and thoughtful poster) cannot bring himself to answer this straightforward question. No “gotcha” in there.
Alcyone, the profound meaning hadn’t occurred to me, but it is entirely apt; thank you.
I have great respect for Mary. Of course she has become hardened by the long years of battle that were inevitable on the path of justice that she had the courage to choose. Ego – self-image and the protection thereof – would be a necessity on that path to all but a tiny minority of truly exceptional individuals, and if we left all struggle to those few, improvement would come much slower than it does. We must not let the best become the enemy of the good.
Habbabkuk and Mary, remember that the task is to win friends rather than annihilate enemies.
“…But even a two-state solution would be better than the current situation.”
Yes you are right. But realistically it ain’t going to happen.
Ha’aretz: Segregation of Jews and Arabs in 2010 Israel is almost absolute. I don’t know if the law under consideration that the article discusses was in the end passed, but the article mentions things that had already happened within Israel proper by the time the article was written:
This article also concerns Israel proper: SCHOOL SEGREGATION IN ISRAEL:
Clark
11 Jul, 2015 19h05
“Habbabkuk and Mary, remember that the task is to win friends rather than annihilate enemies.”
No Sir, I beg to differ. The word friend derives from love. Love is a state not a task.
The task is to flower. And the flower doesn’t care who comes to smell its perfume.
Clark
“Habbabkuk and Mary, remember that the task is to win friends rather than annihilate enemies.”
___________________
That reminds me of an anecdote about Aneurin Bevan and Ernest Bevin. Someone once said to Enest Bevin “Aneurin is his own worst enemy”> In reply to which Bevin allegedly growled “Not while I’m alive he ain’t”.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
More seriously, though – what makes you think I regard Mary as an enemy and what makes you think I have regard of any kind for Mary?
Clark @ 19h02
” and if we left all struggle to those few, improvement would come much slower than it does. We must not let the best become the enemy of the good.”
Clark if something is marginally modified, but in essence the same, is that improvement?
I don’t talk in terms of the measurement of the ‘best’. However, there is a different process. Surely, paradise ought to be here if human beings eliminate tribalism, conflict, greed, competition….and live with compassion. There is no paradise elsewhere. Or if there is, one can only access it through a paradise here in this existence, in this life.
Mary has chosen her tribe; then you become part of the conflict. That is a rational observation.
Yes, thanks, Habbabkuk, glad you’ce enjoyed it – truly I’ve found it fruitful, too.
Lysias, yes, it – dsicrimination – is a real problem, which people like Ahmed Tibi and the doctor/writer I mentioned earlier, and many others, are busy working against/to rectify. The Palestine Journal blog alludes to this in detail in the case of the latter.
Glenn, re Fed Up, well, exactly.
Daniel, I know, you’re right, a two-state solution is unlikely.
Clark, good man.
Max Blumenthal’s Goliath is full of examples of government discrimination and mob violence against Palestinians living within Israel proper. Here’s one paragraph I found after looking again a bit at the book on my Kindle (because I used a Kindle, I cannot give a page reference, but it is from Chapter 9):
Clark there is a difference between getting personal, and becoming involved personally. This is not the first time you have taken the route of; shoot me, hang me, etc. The fact that the keyboard warrior you have mentioned is not a zionist supporter in your eyes, is up to you, but you cannot, emphasis, you cannot foist your conclusions onto others. Mary happens to believe the keyboard warrior is a zionist supporter. In fact I am of the same belief; that cretinous character is a fully paid up shill, and I stopped reading even one line of its’ copious spamming on this blog a long time ago. You can turn the other cheek and be the epitome of piety, but prophet you are not.
Forgiveness is a personal matter, and each person has the choice of forgiving or not, therefore if Mary chooses to not forgive, it is her choice, and regardless of your efforts Mary will not forgive. Perhaps it is time to let a worldly Mary to get on with her life without adding to her burdens under the guise of promotion of peace tranquillity and holding hands to sing kumbaya.
============
Saint SS of Jerusalem, is long on assumptions, wearing his jaundice tinted glasses shooting from the hip first and then asks from, nay prosecutes the offenders he has already found guilty. Oh the joy of being the Judge, Jury, Cook, Bottle washer, and enforcer.
Reading between the lines, Saint SS is not happy with any sort of supremacy so he claims;
However he then explores other forms; white supremcism, Zionism, Arab supremacism, or religious supremacism Nice sentiments, but a red herring. the only white supremacists bunch of any consequence were the south Africans, whose barbaric practices were reviled by the world at large hastening its demise and dispatch to graveyard of ignominy. Arab supremacists are the al Saud bunch whose repressive and oppressive measures have exposed these to the revulsion of the entire Arab world, that is other than the little UAE and Qatar not forgetting Bahrain (total population less than that of Cairo). Then why should Saint SS point that out?
Well starting from the assumption that his opponents are supremacists, naturally leads to the denunciation of all supremacists. Although the zionist supremacists enjoy a caveat, these can remain in place and should be left alone, lest zionstan is obliterated!
Then comes the death null of the twists and turns of the one state or two state …….. all the while affording the zionistan the exceptionalism that is customarily afforded to these bunch of vile supremacists by the oligarch owned media and the bought and paid for selected political actors.
Saint SS not content with the prosecutorial lines of questioning, answer ; yes or no, is foisting his silly assumptions, formed around his sillier Weltanschauung. The apparent pick and mix principles of; yes the discrimination is there for the Palestinians living in zionistan ( no kidding sherlock) but then taking comfort in finding there, those who are fighting it from within. In the leave of absence of reason; it is concluded that zionistan should be returned back to pre 1967 borders, and ………………. Nero fiddling while Rome burns jumps into mind.
Saint SS not content with his judicial/enforcer role, then sets himself up as the representatives of the Palestinians too, and tells us what these Palestinians wish for and want!
Then Saint SS marches on, to yet again reassert his prosecutor role and turns to the gallery to ask why is Fedup so reluctant to answer; yes or no?
The fact conveniently forgotten is; it is not Fedup, or any of the participants, included Mary, along with Millions of Palestinians who form tany obstacle to peace in the mid east. But it is the zionists whose supremacist claptrap has been the obstacle to any peaceful resolution of the current mess in the mid east, form the word go.
Clark can be pretty sanguine about forgiveness, after all it was not his child/brother/sister/wife/husband/father/mother whom have been killed or maimed by the zionist shells/bullets/bombs/DIME (decapitating small children). Clark can forgive, because he never has been witness to or has had to find a plastic carrier bag and start searching for the scattered remains of his child. Life is so simple when the carnage and mayhem is in far away lands, and the victims shrieks are never heard.
Saint SS despite going on record about the plight of Palestinians, worries about the “obliteration” of zionistan. This stance of course solely hinges upon zionist never giving up their vile cretinous supremacy, which begs the question why?
The fact that Afrikaner were too busy setting up black only states, and were drawing up lines on the maps to let the blacks go and be out of the precious Afrikaner sight, evidently has no parallels with current one state or two ……… Best to stick to the narrative and genuflect (in a none conformist fashion sensibly of course!) to the prevalent lines of the story; compliance with all things zionist whilst pouring wrath and apportioning blame onto anyone who opposes these vile miscreants.
Now where were we? Oh yeah the answers of yes or no!
Lysias,
Blumenthal is free to enter Israel whenever he likes. Pappe, Atzmon and Finkelstein are not. I wonder why that might be?
Max Blumenthal is the son of Sidney Blumenthal, a close adviser of Hillary and Bill Clinton. I imagine the Israelis are reluctant to act against him.
Fedup, 9:20 pm, that’s an awful lot of words (over 900) and you’re obviously very angry; I have two questions. How would you prefer the Israel / Palestine conflict resolved? And what is your personal involvement with it?
That reminds me of an anecdote about Aneurin Bevan and Ernest Bevin. Someone once said to Enest Bevin “Aneurin is his own worst enemy”> In reply to which Bevin allegedly growled “Not while I’m alive he ain’t”.
You’re wrong there Habba- Ernest Bevin said that about Herbert Morrison, nor his near namesake-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_westminster_hour/1899102.stm
Ernest Bevin said that about Herbert Morrison, nor his near namesake
I should also add that the quotation attributed to Bevin was popularised by the dodgy bisexual Tory MP, Bob Boothby
http://spartacus-educational.com/TUbevin.htm
Ahhh. Lord Boothby.
The ladies having retired, three gentlemen settle down to discuss great affairs of state, over cigarettes and whiskey.
http://www.nickelinthemachine.com/2009/02/no1-eaton-square-lord-boothby-and-ronnie-kray/
Ahhh. Lord Boothby.
Herbie- I euphemistically called Boothby ‘dodgy’, but Ludovic Kennedy’s description, as mentioned in your link, is probably more accurate !
Fed Up, you are an intelligent person. I respect your intelligence. I truly am sorry if I have upset or angered you.
So may I politely enquire as to precisly why, with all your intelligence, knowledge, engagement and humour, you appear unable, or unwilling, to answer my very simple – and with respect to the subject at hand, core – question? I am really sorry to ask it again. I am sorry to be a pest. But I am sure that people would be quite interested in knowing your view on this important subject. Forget what you might think of me – I am irrelevant. If the plight of the Palestinians is your prime concern in this – as it should be – then can you not see that it is a little puzzling that you seem to be avoiding the provision of a view on the central issue of whether there should be a Palestinian state?
Here it is again:
Do you support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state (either a one or a two-state solution)?
Thank you for your time.