For many Palestinians, today doesn’t mark 67 years since the Nakba, but rather 67 years of the Nakba.
In 1948, an estimated 700,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homeland in what Palestinians call the Nakba, or “catastrophe,” that gave birth to the State of Israel. This tragedy has been compounded by the fact that, despite an affirmation by the United Nations that same year that the Palestinians could return to their homes or receive compensation if they wish, they still haven’t been granted the right of return.
Yet the Nakba is routinely overlooked in our campus discussions. Just recently, some students celebrated Israeli Independence Day, commemorating the formation of Israel. Throughout an entire day of festivities, there was no mention of the Nakba by those celebrating.
This has become par for the course. However, ignoring the Nakba creates a massive gap in what is arguably the most contentious debate on campus. The mass displacement of Palestinians is undoubtedly a major cornerstone of the conflict, no matter how polarizing it is.
Bruins for Israel president and fourth-year economics student Eytan Davidovits said the organization recognizes that the anniversary of the Nakba is a sensitive day for many students, opting to refrain from commenting.
But not recognizing the Nakba for what it is – a human tragedy – ensures that the conversation surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains incomplete.
It’s more than fair to say the Jewish people needed a safe haven, especially in the 1940s. Few would dispute that. But that doesn’t make the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of people from their ancestral homeland any less tragic. If we are to elevate the quality of our discussion around this significant issue, the Nakba must, at the very least, be acknowledged and addressed by all groups who have a stake in the conversation.
That is particularly true because the parties that have a stake in this conversation do not exist only in a binary opposition, either “pro-Israel” or “pro-Palestine.” Nuance exists in this debate, and in order to acknowledge that nuance, we must acknowledge every part of the history of this conflict.
Third-year economics student Eitan Peled is Students for Justice in Palestine’s programming director and the transitioning president of Jewish Voice for Peace. Peled is the great-grandson of a signatory of the Israeli Declaration of Independence and grandson of a prominent Israeli general-turned-peace advocate. Peled lost a 13-year-old cousin to a suicide bombing in Israel.
Despite their family history, Peled and his family still advocate for the end of the occupation and the Palestinian right of return. Disregarding voices like Peled’s that work to disrupt the essentialist view of the two sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a huge obstacle for creating any sort of productive campus dialogue.
Peled also pointed out the mistakes we make when talking about the conflict on campus. Calling one side “pro-Israel” makes the other seem “anti-Israel,” even if some of those who are opposed to Israeli policy are only against human rights violations and support the Palestinian right of return, not necessarily against the state itself.
One subject that is often brought up in campus discussions to drown out this perspective is Hamas, the party and militant organization that effectively governs Gaza, and its consistent targeting of Israeli civilians. To be sure, many of Hamas’ actions are abhorrent, but some students quickly forget, or simply avoid talking about, the Zionist terrorism that led to the creation of Israel.
Events like the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946, an event that has been celebrated in Israel; the infamous Deir Yassin massacre by the militant Zionist organization Irgun, then led by future Israeli prime minister and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Menachem Begin; and the dozens of other massacres carried out by the same group from 1937 to 1948, are huge parts of the narrative. These events, which culminated in the Nakba and are major milestones in the history of the creation of Israel, often go ignored in campus discourse.
These aren’t opinions on a complex issue. They’re indisputable historical events.
There can be no campus dialogue if history is deliberately swept under the rug. To use Hamas, which was founded in 1987, almost 40 years after the founding of Israel and 20 years after the ongoing occupation of the West Bank began, as a counterargument to pro-Palestinian students’ criticism of the occupation is to ignore the instrumental role terrorism played in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and the creation of Israel.
Ignoring the Nakba while talking about Israeli independence is akin to talking about the history of the United States without mentioning the mass displacement of indigenous peoples. Historical revisionism can have dangerous consequences and can put mental and emotional strain on students affected by these traumatic events. It’s time for students to realize that.
Mr. Googasian,
I’ve read history books from people who take the Palestinian point-of-view, like Dr. Edward Said and Dr. Norman Finkelstein. Have you ever read any history books from the Israeli point-of-view? I don’t think you have. Your opinion reads like someone who has only studied one side of this conflict.
I’m left wondering, did you leave out facts from ignorance, or are you actually so antisemitic that you’ll blatantly try to revise history?
Frankly, judging from some of the other things I’ve seen you write, I suspect the later. I think this “opinion piece” is just another one of your dishonest attempts to justify bigoted Arab leadership, while simultaneously demonizing the delegitimizing the state of Israel and it’s people.
For the sake of anyone reading your propaganda, I’m going to present a few facts that you chose to leave out – and we’ll let the reader decide if your “opinion” is fair or not.
You Wrote:
“In 1948, an estimated 700,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homeland in what Palestinians call the Nakba, or “catastrophe,” that gave birth to the State of Israel.”
What you neglected to mention is that the “Nakba” occurred when the United Nations voted in favor (by a 2/3 majority) to create two states – a “partition plan” that would create one state for Palestinian Arabs and one state for Palestinian Jews. The UN did this because it determined Palestinian-Arabs and Palestinian-Jews BOTH had legitimate claims to the land. The Arabs wanted to rule over the Jews. The Jews wanted self-determination – they wanted their own government. The UN voted in favor of self-determination for BOTH Arabs and Jews. Both were offered a state of their own. The Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected.
One day after Israel declared itself a state, a combined invasion by Egypt, Jordan and Syria, together with expeditionary forces from Iraq attacked and invaded Palestine/Israel. Their intent was not to just conquer the Jews, but to commit genocide and murder them. The Arab nations announced this on their national radios: “Drive the Jews into the sea”.
Many Palestinian who left the area did so to either avoid the attacking Arab armies, or to actually join up with the Arab armies to destroy Israel. Many other Palestinian-Arabs decided not to leave their homes and those that remained became Arab-Israeli citizens. To this day, these Arab-Israeli citizens live in Israel and have are guaranteed more civil rights by the state of Israel than any Arab states grants it’s citizens in the region.
Another thing you neglected to mention is that an equal number of Jews (approximately 700,000) were expelled out of Arab states. How come there are no Jewish refugee camps today? The reason is that Israel absorbed their Jewish refugees. Israel has 1/800th the amount of land that the Arab states have, and yet Israel was able to solve their refugee problem in a matter of a few years. Why didn’t the Arab states do the same thing for the Palestinian refugees? Why did they leave them in refugee camps?
The real truth is, the “Nakba” didn’t have to happen. Had the Arabs simply allowed the Jews their right of self-determination, had the Palestinians accepted their state along side Israel – as voted by 2/3rds of the UN – the “catastrophe” of displacement on both sides would not have happened.
The 1948 Arab-Israeli war would go on for 10 months and 1% of the population of Israeli-Jews would die in the combat. When a truce was finally set, Israel retained slightly more than the original area granted by the UN.
Egypt had seized the Gaza Strip and Jordan had seized the West Bank. This was supposed to be the land the UN set aside for the new Palestinian state. Both Egypt and Jordan illegally occupied this land from 1948 to 1967. For 19 years, there was no Israeli occupation of Gaza or the West Bank; no Israeli settlements; nothing to stop Egypt and Jordan from creating a Palestinian state. 19 years! Why didn’t they set up a Palestinian state for those 19 years?
They didn’t do it because they didn’t want to recognize the state of Israel at all. In 1967, the Arab nations conspired and tried to destroy Israel again, and this time the Arabs nations lost territory – and that’s how the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank came to be.
Again, had the Arabs simply accepted the 2 state solution, had they set up a Palestinian state; had they not tried to destroy Israel; had Egypt and Jordan set up a Palestinian State over the following 19 years when they occupied the Gaza Strip and the West Bank; had the Arab armies not tried to destroy Israel in 67; the “Nakba” would not have been a catastrophe for both sides. Both Palestinian-Arabs and Palestinian-Jews were victims of bad decisions by Arab leadership.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War
Now before you ask Israel acknowledges the “Nakba”, don’t you think people like yourself should acknowledge what really happened first?
You Write…
“To be sure, many of Hamas’ actions are abhorrent, but some students quickly forget, or simply avoid talking about, the Zionist terrorism that led to the creation of Israel.”
When comparing Zionist resistance groups to Hamas terrorism, you neglect to point out the key differences.
Unlike Hamas and Hezbollah – who publicly state that they seeks to commit genocide and kill all Jews all over the world – Zionist resistance groups NEVER called for the genocide of an entire ethnic group.
Unlike Hamas and Hezbollah – who intentionally target civilians – Zionist resistance groups focused their fight on British and Arab military forces. They very rarely targeted civilians. When civilian causalities occurred, the acting Israeli government and the Israeli public resoundingly condemned it.
Cases like the King David Hotel and Deir Yassin are brought up frequently because they are the rare and regrettable exceptions. But when you compare the number of attacks on civilians from Hamas and Hezbollah, to the number of attacks on civilians from the Irgun and Stern gang, the truth becomes very clear: Hamas and Hezbollah surpass any Jewish terrorism by a rate exceeding 1000-to-1.
And as a side note, the only reason the King David Hotel was targeted was because it was housing a huge number of British troops. Before the bomb went off, to reduce the possibility of civilian casualties, the Irgun phoned several warnings to the hotel, but the warning were dismissed as a hoax. Years later, the British Army would admit this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing
Finally, unlike Hamas and Hezbollah, the Irgun and the Stern gang were considered outlaws by the Israeli government. The Palestinian Authority and the Syrian Government have never even arrested a member of Hamas or Hezbollah for an attack on an Israeli civilian. But the Israeli government ultimately used force to destroy both the Irgun and Stern gang.
You Wrote…
“Historical revisionism can have dangerous consequences and can put mental and emotional strain on students affected by these traumatic events. It’s time for students to realize that.”
I couldn’t agree with you more. It is a shame antisemites like you can’t practice what you preach.
Mr. Googasian,
I’ve read history books from people who take the Palestinian point-of-view, like Dr. Edward Said and Dr. Norman Finkelstein. Have you ever read any history books from the Israeli point-of-view. I don’t think you have. You sound like someone who has read nothing but one-sided propaganda your whole life.
I’m left wondering, did you unintentionally leave facts out through ignorance, or are you actually so antisemitic that you’ll try to revise history?
Frankly, judging from some of the other things I’ve seen you write, I think it is the later. I think this “opinion piece” is an attempt justify bigotted Arab leadership, while simultaniously demonizing the delegitimizing the state of Israel and it’s people.
For the sake of anyone who reads your propaganda, I’m going to present a few facts here that you chose to leave out – and I’ll let the reader decide if your opinion is fair or not.
You Wrote:
“In 1948, an estimated 700,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homeland in what Palestinians call the Nakba, or “catastrophe,” that gave birth to the State of Israel.”
What you neglected to mention is that the “Nakba” occurred when the United Nations voted in favor (by a 2/3 majority) to create two states – a “partition plan” that would create one state for Palestinian Arabs and one state for Palestinian Jews. The UN did this because it determined Palestinian-Arabs and Palestinian-Jews BOTH had legitimate claims to the land. The Arabs wanted to rule over the Jews. The Jews wanted self-determination – they wanted their own government. The UN voted in favor of self-determination for BOTH Arabs and Jews, the Jews accepted it and the Arabs rejected it.
One day after Isreal declared itself a state, a combined invasion by Egypt, Jordan and Syria, together with expeditionary forces from Iraq attacked and invaded Palestine. Their intent was not to just conquer the Jews, but to commit genocide and murder them. The Arab nations announced on their national radios that their intent was to “drive the Jews into the sea”.
Most of the Palestinian refugees who left the area did so to either avoid the attacking Arab armies, or to actually sought to join up with the Arab armies and fight with them to destroy Israel. Many Arabs decided not to leave their homes and those that remained became Arab-Israeli citizens. To this day, these Arab-Israeli citizens live in Israel and have more rights in Israel and are guaranteed more civil rights by the state of Israel than any Arab states in the region.
Another thing you neglected to mention is that an equal number of Jews (approximately 700,000) were expelled out of Arab states in the region. How come there are no Jewish refugee camps today? The reason is that Israel absorbed their Jewish refugees. Israel has 1/800th the amount of land that the Arab states have, and yet Israel was able to solve their refugee problem in a matter of a few years. Why didn’t the Arab states do the same thing for the Palestinian refugees? Why did they leave them in refugee camps?
The “Nakba” didn’t have to happen. Hadn’t the Arabs simply allowed the Jews their right of self-determination, hadn’t the Palestinans accepted their state along side Israel – as voted by 2/3rds of the UN – the “catastophe” of displacement on both sides would not have happened.
The 1948 Arab-Israeli war would go on for 10 months and 1% of the population of Israeli-Jews would die in the combat. When a truce was finally set, Israel retained slightly more than the original area granted to it by the UN.
Egypt siezed the Gaza Strip and Jordan siezed the West Bank. This was supposed to be the land for the new Palestinian state. Both Egypt and Jordan illegally occupied this land from 1948 to 1967. For 19 years, there was no Israeli occupation of Gaza or the West Bank, no Israeli settlements, nothing to stop Egypt and Jordan from creating a Palestinian state. 19 years! Why didn’t they set up a Palestinian state for those 19 years?
They didn’t do it because they didn’t want to recognize the state of Israel at all. In 1967, the Arab nations conspired and tried to destroy Israel again, and this time the Arabs nations lost territory – and that’s how the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank came to be.
Again, hadn’t the Arabs simply accepted the 2 state solution, hadn’t they set up a Palestinian state; hadn’t they not tried to destroy Israel in 48; hadn’t Egypt and Jordan set up a Palestinian State over the following 19 years when they occupied the Gaza Strip and the West Bank; hadn’t the Arab armies tried to destroy Israel in 67; the “Nakba” would not have been a catastrophe for both sides. Both Palestinian-Arabs and Palestinian-Jews were victims of bad decisions by Arab leadership.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War
Before Israel acknowledges the “Nakba”, don’t you think people like you should acknowledge what really happened first?
You Write…
“To be sure, many of Hamas’ actions are abhorrent, but some students quickly forget, or simply avoid talking about, the Zionist terrorism that led to the creation of Israel.”
When comparing Zionist resistence groups to Hamas terrorism, you neglect to point out the key differences.
Unlike Hamas and Hezbolla – who publicly state that they seeks to commit genocide and kill all Jews all over the world – Zionist resistence groups NEVER called for the genocide of an entire ethnic group.
Unlike Hamas and Hezbolla – who intentionally target civilians – Zionist resistence groups focused their fight on British military forces. They very rarely targeted civilians, and when they did, the Israeli public resoundingly rejected the tactic.
Cases like the King David Hotel and the attack on Dar Shrin are brought up frequently because they are the rare and regretable exceptions. But when you compare the number of attacks on civilians from Hamas and Hezbolla, to the number of attacks on civilians from the Irgune and Stern gangs, you’ll find that Hamas and Hezbolla surpass any Jewish terrorism by a rate exceeding 1000-to-1.
And as a side note, the only reason the King David Hotel was targeted was because it was housing a huge number of British troops. Before the bomb went off, to reduce the possibility of civilian casualties, the Irgune phoned several warnings to the hotel, but the warning were dismissed as a hoax. Years later, the British Army would admit this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing
Finally, unlike Hamas and Hezbolla, the Irgun and the Stern gang were considered outlaws by the Israeli government. The Palestinian Authority and the Syrian Government have never even arrested a member of Hamas or Hezbolla for an attack on an Israeli civilian. But the Israeli government ultimately used force to stop the Irgun and Stern gang.
You Wrote…
“Historical revisionism can have dangerous consequences and can put mental and emotional strain on students affected by these traumatic events. It’s time for students to realize that.”
This is the only true thing you wrote. It is a shame you can’t practice what you preach.
“they were adhering to a consistent principal that had been applied since the end of WWI: All people have a right to self-determination. ”
Except the residents of Arabs of Palestine were not allowed that. So much for veracity of the rest of your “facts”.
You Wrote…
“Except the Arab residents of Palestine were not allowed that. So much for veracity of the rest of your “facts”.’
You’re obviously very ignorant of the true facts. Like Googasian, you’re reading way too much propaganda. It would do you some good to read somethings from the other side of this argument because you clearly don’t know the true history here.
UN Resolution 181 was a “partition plan”. It divided the land to form two states and it offered international recognition to a Palestinian State AND a Jewish State. The Jews accepted 181 and formed Israel. The Arabs rejected 181, refused to form a Palestinian State, and 5 Arab nations attacked the new state of Israel. In 1948, it was Arab League troops that entered the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, not Israel. When the 1948 war ended, it was Egypt and Jordan that illegally occupied the Gaza strip and the West Bank, not Israel.
The only reason the residents of Palestine did not get self-determination (a state of their own) was because the Arab leadership rejected 181. In essences, the Arab leadership wanted to rule over all of Palestine. They rejected self-determination for BOTH Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews.
“they were adhering to a consistent principal that had been applied since the end of WWI: All people have a right to self-determination. ”
I’m pointing to you own statement and the fact that Arabs of Palestine were never allowed that. You can tell me all about partition, but it lacks the basic tenet that you yourself have put forward. i.e a right to self-determination.
I still don’t understand what you are trying to say in that statement.
You say, “The Arabs of Palestine were never allowed that (right of self-determination)”. This is true, but this certainly isn’t Israel’s fault. The fact is, no one in Palestine was ever allowed the right of self-determination until 1948. The Ottoman’s ruled from 1413 till the end of WW1. The British controlled the mandate till 1948 when they turned the matter over to the UN.
In 1948, for the first time, BOTH Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews were offered the opportunity to set up a state of their own and exercise their rights of self-determination – their right to set up a government of their choosing in their state.
The Jewish leadership wanted this. The accepted and set up Israel.
The Arabs leadership did not want this. They rejected and declared war on Israel.
If, in 1948, the “Arabs of Palestine were never allowed self-determination”, it is only because the Arab leadership refused to turn that right over to the Palestinian people. The Arab leadership knew that if they accepted the UN resolution, they would have to accept Israel – and they didn’t want to do that.
Even after the 48 war, Egypt and Jordan illegally occupied the West Bank and Gaza and still refused to grant the Palestinian people their state and their right to self-determination. It seems obvious that the Arab leadership intended to destroy Israel and divide the land between them. If they had had their way, Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews would have probably been annexed into Egypt, Jordan and Syria. Neither Arabs or Jews in Palestine would have been given their state or their rights.
The Arab leadership is responsible for the plight the Palestinians find themselves in today.
The Arab residents of Palestine had two opportunities for self-determination. First, in 1947, the UN Partition Plan was to create *two* states: one Jewish, one Arab. The Jews in Palestine accepted it. The Arabs attacked Israel.
How about some simple facts about the time since 1948?
1. FACT: Palestinian Arabs who left Israel (for whatever reason) and ended up in the West Bank and Gaza were under Jordanian and Egyptian control, respectively, from 1948-1967. Why didn’t they realize self-determination then?
2. FACT: 700,000 Jews left Arab countries in 1945-1955 under circumstances remarkably similar to those felt by the Palestinian Arabs. Like them, the Jews left for a combination of reasons, including pressure from their former homelands and calls from Israel to leave. No mention of that in your article, is there?
3. FACT: The PLO was founded in 1964, while Gaza and the West Bank were still in Arab hands. Exactly what did the PLO want to liberate, and from whom?
4. FACT: Israel has offered peace to the Palestinians multiple times. Each time, they’ve been rebuffed. In 2000, Nabil Amr accused Arafat of scuttling the 2000 Camp David Summit. Bill Clinton also blamed Arafat for the failure of the talks.
5. FACT: Palestinian Arab citizens vote in Israeli elections. The recent furor over Netanyahu calling for voters to come out to counter the Arab vote occurred *because* Arab citizens have the same voting rights as everyone else. And, BTW, Netanyahu’s call is no worse than Democrats trying to bring out the vote because the other side is voting too.
I’m not listing opinions here; these are facts. Yet your article seems to ignore them.
You’re saying that we can’t have any discussion without acknowledging the treatment of 700,000 people who left their homeland (under duress) in the Middle East between 1945-1955. That’s reasonable, and I won’t debate the question of who told the Palestinians to leave their homes (calls from the Arab countries that attacked Israel were at least as responsible as Israel itself). But there were *TWO* groups of refugees in that time period: the Palestinians (as this article notes), and an equally large number of Jews who were forced out of Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Morocco, and other countries. The Jews had been living in their homelands for longer periods of time (over 2000 years in many cases) than the Palestinians, but were forced to leave for similar reasons. The difference between the two groups? The Jews were absorbed into Israeli society, but the Palestinians were forced by their Arab brethren in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt (and elsewhere) to remain in refugee camps. When you consider the relative size of the Israeli and Arab populations (Israel was much smaller) and relative wealth of the countries (in the 1940s and 1950s, Israel was *not* the advanced country it is today), the failure of the Arab countries to absorb the same number of refugees that much smaller Israel did is even more dramatic.
You also mention the “ethnic cleansing” of Israel. With 15% of current Israeli citizens being Arab Muslims, it’s clear that Israel didn’t make a concerted effort to exile the entire Palestinian population. Both the reduction of the Yemenite Jewish population from over 50,000 in 1945 to 90 today, or the reduction of the Moroccan Jewish population from 250,000 in the 1940s to 2,500 today are much better examples of ethnic cleansing. Then, there’s the Iraqi Jewish community, dating back to the Babylonian exile 2700 years ago and numbering over 150,000 in 1947. It’s now below 100, thanks to severe anti-Semitism and laws targeting Jews. But go ahead and accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing when people of all nationalities have full rights as citizens.
Ignoring the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands while talking about the Nakba is akin to talking about the history of the United States without mentioning the mass displacement of indigenous peoples. Your words, not mine.
Israel got the land for its refugees. Palestinians who were chased from Israel, are now being evicted from the West Bank and other areas that were never given to Israel. Blaming other Arabs countries for not “absorbing” refugees while Jews got an entire country to “absorb” refugees is rather hypocritical.
The historical record is quite clear. Israel did ethnically cleanse Palestinians. Lets not pretend otherwise.
Palestinians were not “chased from their land”.
You’re trying to conflate the occupied territories (Gaza and the West Bank) with Israel proper.
Right now, over 1.2 million Palestinian Arabs live in Israel proper. They are Israeli citizens. Over 20% of Israel’s population is Arab and it has been growing steadily for the past 10 years. Palestinian Arabs are found in every layer of Israeli society including prominent positions in law enforcement, government and even the Supreme court. Israel even offers affirmative action plans for Israeli-Arab students to attend Israeli Universities. Does any of this sound like ethnic cleansing to you?
Meanwhile, if you’re really bothered by ethnic cleansing, you should take a look at what Hamas has done in Gaza. They’ve past a law: It is a crime for a Jew to live in Gaza, unless they are over 97 years old. The penalty is death.
The current population of Jews living in Gaza equals exactly zero.
Now that’s ethnic cleansing!
Yes, they were. Both from Israel proper and now confined to sections of the West Bank. Arabs in Israel are at best fifth class citizens. For being 20 percent of the country their role in Israel is minimal.
Your definition of “ethnic cleansing” is pretty sardonic. Jews get an entire country and you want to complain that they can’t go squat on other people’s land. Nice !!!
I gave you facts, you return with sarcasm. I list several ways how Arabs are an integral part of Israeli society, You say, “Arabs are at best a 5th class citizen”, but you offer up no evidence to back your position.
Look, if you really seek a resolution to this conflict, you need to be a little more fair and honest about what’s going on over there. You and I can both agree that Palestinians need help. We differ on who we think is responsible for the plight of the Palestinian people. I’ve written extensively in this thread about why I think the Arab leadership is responsible for the problem.
If you insist on blaming Israel, well, that’s you’re right. I just hope you are looking at the facts and making a fair decision. If you just want to blame Israel without looking at the facts, than you’re really not helping anyone.
Dude, you talk about history but all you spew out is one-sided propaganda. You have some valid points, but only one perspective that you understand as truth. What are you trying to prove? That you’ve never taken a history class before? Maybe you should be a politician. That way you don’t have to possess all the facts, but just pander to emotions…much like this piece does.
Read more than one book sometime…
There are a lot of issues with this piece, but the biggest in my mind is the claim that Israelis “celebrate” the bombing of the King David Hotel. It’s pretty clear from the linked article that the plaque served as a memorial, not a celebration. Nobody, now or then, celebrated the victims of the King David Hotel bombing, which was not intended to cause loss of life.
Moreover, that event doesn’t somehow excuse the madness of Hamas, which is orders of magnitude more violent and more insane than the Irgun ever were. The author also seems to think Hamas isn’t relevant to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, even though they govern 40% of the Palestinian population. The fact that Hamas continues to pursue a path of pure violence against Israel, with the support of Gazans, even after Israel effectively withdrew from the territory, is one of the biggest obstacles to peace today. How can anyone expect Israel to try the same thing in the West Bank after what happened in Gaza and southern Lebanon?