SECTION 2: [Continuation: Deconstructed Contents]
Barbara Kay: If the Arabs had accepted the two-state solution proposed by the
UN partition plan of 1947, they would have been living in their own state for
60 years in peace with Israel. Why do you blame Israel for Arab intransigence
Refutation: Interestingly, lacking a coherent theory of explanation,
Kay undermines her argument (Part 10)
about stopping population transfers by injecting the infeasible formula of
�retroactive suppositions.� Now, she seemed to suggest that the transfer of
targeted population should halt at a time favorable to the dispossessors. Not
only that, but by dint of the same implication, she suggests that the
Palestinians should have accepted the dispossession of more than half their
Dialectically, this type of reasoning is both: flawed and
worthless. In figurative terms: imagine that we rob you, then turn around and
ask you to accept our robbery and its consequences upon you. Now, imagine that
you vehemently reject and then resist our proposal and begin fighting back to
recover your possession. A this point, imagine that because you refused to be
subjugated to our bullying, we just go ahead and lay the blame on you for
refusing our generous offer that, if accepted, will only consolidate our
supremacy over you, your existence, and your destiny. Now, imagine that we
are the Israelis and you are the Palestinian.
Additionally, one should never loose sight of a few facts:
1) Western colonialist powers installed Israel, 2) hence, Israel could have
never started by its own internal force, and 3) these same powers then imposed
the two-state solution. Consequently, that solution was illegal under natural
law. To illustrate this point, let us paint another scenario. Imagine that we
rob you but that all the Dicks and Janes of the world approve of it. Now, would that make our
robbery legal in your eyes, and would it be acceptable to you?
Logically therefore, Kay�s bogus conclusion: �they would
have been living in their own state for 60 years in peace with Israel� is
historically and ethically null and void. This is especially true considering
that the nature of the Zionist state (which is colonialist expansionism) and
its role as the spear point for Western imperialisms impedes any peaceful
co-existence in its artificially created milieu. By analogy, if the Kay clan is
dispossessed and the dispossessor of the Kay clan can get some legal authority
to ratify a partitioning of the former Kay residence such that the Kay clan is
granted permission to live in the basement, then the Kay clan would be, by her
own argument, stupid to refuse.
Kay [to Kim]: You mention the expulsion of the European Jews. I notice
you fail to mention the expulsion of the Jews in Arab lands, of which there
were 600,000, the exact same number as the Palestinians.
Refutation: For starters, if an independent
international committee with knowledge of history and the development of world
societies would want to give a special trophy to the most outrageous liars of
all time, it is probable that Zionists would win without trouble. Figuratively,
lies are the cement that holds the Zionist falsifications of history together.
But this cement is temporary in nature, brittle inside, and thus cannot
withstand the simplest of verification tests.
have a look at recent history:
historical facts do not support the claim that Germany or Italy expelled
600,000 European Jews out of Europe. Expulsion is not the term. Because of the
conditions created by World War 2, there had been a huge efflux of European
Jewish refugees and immigrants. However, we do not have exact data on their
number, and if a number exists, then it is normally inflated.
Zionist movements in Europe together with Western colonialist powers rendered
help to Jewish refugees and engineered their transfer -- especially to
Palestine -- out of European is not supported by historical facts. Most
important, if European powers persecuted their nationals of Jewish faith, we do
not see any rationale that the Palestinians must pay for it. This is extremely
important considering that in the sixth Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, in 1903, Theodor
Herzl, the founder of the Zionist movement, discussed and then rejected a
proposal to establish a Jewish state in Uganda. The meaning of this is paramount:
The Zionist movement had no any historical claim over Palestine, since they were shopping to establish a Jewish
state wherever the conditions were propitious. From a British colonialist
viewpoint, establishing such a state in Palestine was a winning move owing to
the discovery of oil in Iraq, Iran, and the Gulf region.
the expulsion of Arabs of Jewish faith including a genuine minuscule minority
of descendents from the ancient Hebrews (not to be mixed with European converts
to Judaism), did not happen automatically, but was, again, engineered by
Britain, France, and the United States. Notorious among these facts of social
engineering was Operation Babylon where Britain, with the complicity of an
�Iraqi government� under British neo-colonial rule (1921-1958), carried out the
exodus of Iraqi Arabs of Jewish faith to Israel. According to Iraqi records,
the number of those Iraqis transferred to Palestine could not have exceeded
the total number of Arabs of Jewish faith from Egypt, Syria, Libya, etc., that
Britain (again with the complicity of Arab rulers under its control) managed to
send to OCCUPIED PALESTINE so the newly formed Zionist state would not collapse
because of lack of population, could not have exceeded at best the 200,000. Any
number beyond this is falsification.
DISCUSSION: Zionist literature about a
so-called forced transfer of Arabs of Jewish faith to the newly established
Zionist �state� of Israel is not only abundant but also of a flooding nature.
It is really beside the point to state that Zionists authored this literature
not because of a debt to history but because of intense intent to deceive
Western readers. Opposing Arab literature also abounds, but the invariable fact
that emerges from the Arab literature is that Britain and France, which ruled
the Arab Middle East as colonial powers, arranged those transfers with Arab
governments that were neither independent nor sovereign.
In addition, whether
in Operation Babylon (in Iraq) or the Lavon Affair (in Egypt), it was British
Zionist agents who engineered acts of violence against the Jewish population to
ease their transfer. In the specific case of Iraq, Shlomo Hillel (calling
himself an Iraqi Jew) described his Operation Babylon in romantic overtones as if
the story were a novel, and Iraqi annals of history do not corroborate his many
details. The infamous Lavon Affair (Operation Susannah), where Zionist Jews
engineered violence against Egyptian Jews to ease their transfer to Israel, is
a patent example how the transfer of a part of the Arab Jewish population
happened. This is the hideous face of Zionist disinformation; it ascribes its
own crimes and Western imperialist crimes (committed with a handful of
collaborator Arabs) against Arab Jews to the otherwise innocent Arab
Since discussing this subject is not the purpose of this
series, and regardless of all the preceding, we shall not loose sight of the
only problem in the Middle East: Israeli existence in the Middle East was not a
product of so-called Zionist nationalism but a product of colonial
arrangements. Even if we were to acknowledge the existence of Israel as a
�normal state� in the region, said acknowledgment does not resolve the
Palestinian issue, nor will it lead Israel to de-nuclearize or cease its quest
to control the Arab states or pervert their socio-political, religious, and
other hand, whatever the number of Jewish peoples transferred to Palestine, the
fact remains that the installed Zionist �state� (a state without resources or proper state structures) managed to administer such enormous human waves of
immigrants, proves that without an astronomical infusion of Western money to
prop up the exclusivist Jewish entity, Israel could not have survived long. The
following links provide documentation on the size and scope of the US financial
and military aid  to sustain Israeli racism and occupation of Palestinian,
Syrian, and Lebanese lands:
Kay: Except they were not left to rot by their brethren as the Arab
refugees were; they were absorbed by Israel, just as the Arab refugees should
have been absorbed by Jordan, since ethnically they are Jordanians.
Refutation: With this statement, Kay mixes obvious
Zionist fallacies, stark manipulation, and macroscopic ignorance. Let us
deconstruct Kay�s statement attentively.
One: It is the apogee
of arrogance that Zionists created the Palestinian problem but want the Arabs
to resolve its consequence. Specifically, why do Kay and Zionists create the
problem and Kay wants Jordan or other Arabs to resolve it? Why make a space for
people who came from every corner of the world just because they profess to
practice Judaism although they have no ethnic affinity with each other? Again,
a rhetorical question may clarify the situation: Would you accept that we rob
you, take your home, orchid, furniture, and seize your bank accounts, but then
ask your other family members to compensate you and offer you shelter in their
homes, while we enjoy the home, the orchid, and the money we took from you?
Two: The division of
the Arab world is part of divide-and-conquer tactics of imperialist powers.
Kay�s discussion of Arab and Jewish �brethren� is fanciful and deceptive. For
instance, Jews, unlike Arabs, are not brethren -- tribes, maybe, but not
brethren. While Jews may be connected among all tribes by religious affiliation
(and even this does not hold universally), they are not ethnically related
across all tribes. Arabs, however, constitute an ethnicity.
We stated that Kay
has displayed macroscopic ignorance. This is why: she alluded to how Jordan
could have absorbed the Palestinians �since ethnically
they are Jordanians.� To apprise Kay, Jordan is a monarch-controlled political
state and not an ethnic entity; it counts among its people groups of diverse
ethnic origins including Arabs, Arameans, Greeks, and Turks, as well as a labor
pool that includes many Egyptians and Iraqis. The point is: interchanging
nationhood with ethnicity is either an ideological gizmo to prepare for an
apartheid state or ignorance on semantic differences.
We merely note the
discrimination faced by Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews from Ashkenazi Jews,  and
challenge the statement that �Jews were not left to rot by their brethren� with
the statement by earlier Zionist leader David Ben Gurion: "Were I
to know that all German Jewish children could be rescued by transferring them
to England and only half by transfer to Palestine, I would opt for the latter,
because our concern is not only the personal interest of these children, but
the historic interest of the Jewish people." 
Kay: So let me ask you: Was it wrong for the Arabs to expel Jews from
their lands? And since I now assume you will say yes, why don't we agree to
call it a draw.
Refutation: Kay is posing a hollow rhetorical question
with no merit or cogency -- read all the arguments and facts we have reported
thus far. Second, she assumes wrongly. First, we stake our position based in a
simple morality, on principle. Hypothetically, accepting Kay�s allegation of
Arab Jews being expelled from Arab lands (which we do not accept), we state
unequivocally that Jews who are indigenous to the Middle East (Mizrahi and some
Sephardic Jews) and who have maintained peaceful residence in the territory (or
are refugees) have a right of secure residence free from discrimination. Arab
Jews, and other Jews, are entitled to all their rights that any other humans
have. We certainly do not argue for disenfranchisement of Jewish rights or any
other group's human rights. We firmly uphold equality of rights for all humans.
Our purpose is solidarity for the human rights of Palestinians since it is they
who are suffering from their rights being violated.
As for the rest, it
is axiomatic that people of Jewish faith have the rights of all humans to make
residence. They have a right to make a fair living. But Jews do not have the
right to invade and dispossess other people, just as Nazis and Western
colonialists did not have the right to invade, persecute, murder, and
dispossess other peoples. We base our stand on an immutable humanistic
principle that all people share the same rights equally. And deviation from
this principle would constitute intentional supremacist racism.
Kay: The Arabs are now happily free of Jews, and Israel -- while
happily living with their 1 million Arab citizens -- is also happily free of those
Palestinians who wish them dead.
Refutation: With this, Kay reached the peak of insipid rhetorical garbage.
Dissection is not required.
In a Marxian sense,
being a manifestation of ideology, racism is a superstructure to a material
base that determines its magnitude and direction. Many factors exert influence,
including an inculcated sense of racial superiority, transmitted or acquired
religious or non-religious forms of prejudice against nations or groups with
different belief systems, and historically stratified anti-group
though, racism emerges for three main purposes: 1) to achieve territorial
conquest (in this case, racism justifies violence to achieve that conquest), 2)
to maintain the post-conquest status quo, and 3) to keep a group of people or
nations under protracted or permanent subaltern role to justify economic
While racism implies
intense or even virulent dislike of specific others and could eventually
extend to include the physical application of institutionalized ideological
hatred as in anti-group and anti-nation violence, as well as multifaceted
discrimination against targeted victims, the term itself, as evolved now, no
longer targets the victim of racism based on race, color, somatic, or
anthropological traits. Rather, it is now a policy that targets the victims
based on other attributes such as beliefs, place of origin, city of origin,
region of origin, and national origin as in belonging to a specific political
expression of this type of encompassing geographical racism is the violence
unleashed by Zionism and American imperialism against all nations extending
from Western Asia between the eastern coasts of the Mediterranean, excluding
Israel, and to the Western borders of India, and against all nations living in
the southern Mediterranean shores extending to the Horn of Africa and Sudan.
And that is regardless of all other attributes that distinguish the groups
living in these regions.
Does this observation
raise any specific question? Of course, Zionism, Israel, and the United States
elevated anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiments to an irrational level for the
sole purpose to impose imperialism and a neo-colonialism. Likewise, all recent
colonialist policies that allowed Europeans settlers to destroy the Original
Peoples living in the places they invaded by eradicating their familial,
societal, cultural, religious, and politico-economic structures. While the
violent duopoly of expropriation-appropriation at the expense of weaker nations
or groups is the fundamental factor promoting violence, racism assumes the role
of an ideological motivator and facilitator to implement the conquest of
others� territory and wealth.
Having extracted a
fundamental relation that ties racism to conquest, understanding Israeli
Zionist racism should be that of a logical inference, since Israel could have
never existed without ingrained racism to keep its basic ideology of conquest
alive. After the colonization of Palestine in the early 20th century, racism
among the newly arrived Jewish colonists against the invaded people began to
rise with each act of resistance by the indigenous population against the
colonization as a process and finality.
irrefutably racist. The proof is the dispossession and slow-motion genocide
that Israel is waging against the Palestinians in the Middle East. This is why
a state based on Zionism is not only a severe moral issue, but also a focal
point of rejection, tension, and war. A state cannot expect reward or claim the
right to exist through the monstrous crime of murdering and dispossessing an
indigenous people (or people of long-established, continuous, peaceful
The tentacles of
Zionism have pervaded much of the Western world, in large part aided by
infiltration of foreign governments and control of the corporate media. The
crimes of Zionism and any such crimes against an identifiable group must be
abhorred. Zionism, the Zionist state, and the Zionist Power Configuration must be
steadfastly opposed based on a rock solid moral foundation.
In the end, Israeli
racism is a double-edge sword: while it is destroying the Palestinians and
promoting endless wars against the Arabs via the United States and Western
Europe, ultimately it is going to destroy the humanity of people of Jewish
faith, as such racism cannot generate but counter-racism.
On a wider note,
Israeli racism coupled with the global imperialist ambition of the United
States is not going to disappear because of fear of counter-racism by others.
On the contrary, in absence of an equitable
world order where the United States and Israel can no longer rule unopposed,
and in absence of effective Arab and Palestinian resistance, the logic of
brutal force and pervasive fascism seem to feed and perpetuate Israeli racism,
which is now the dynamic core of Israel�s colonialist and imperialist
Since aid is supposed to be for humanitarian or altruistic purposes, it is a
phantasmagorical leap to qualify assistance provided to a racist entity, such
as Zionist Israel, as aid; it is an ideologically driven investment -- NOT aid.
 See �Olmert decries
anti-Ethiopian racism,� JTA Breaking
News, 9 December 2007.
Teveth, Ben-Gurion and the
Brace & Company, New York: 1996). Quoted by David S. Wyman, �Rescue Efforts,� New York Times, 6 July 1997.
Kim Petersen is co-editor
of Dissident Voice and B. J. Sabri is an Iraqi-American antiwar activist
Email them at Petersen_sabri@yahoo.com.