Israeli Establishment Literally Wants Ethnic Cleansing

I know you guys are all tl;dr but seriously you have to read this if you ever want to understand the current state of Israel's political establishment.

Israeli foreign minister wants Palestinians stripped of citizenship and relocated - The National Newspaper

Quote:

Israeli foreign minister wants Palestinians stripped of citizenship and relocated
Jonathan Cook, Foreign Correspondent


NAZARETH // Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s far-right foreign minister, set out this week what he called a “blueprint for a resolution to the conflict” with the Palestinians that demands most of the country’s large Palestinian minority be stripped of citizenship and relocated outside Israel’s future borders.

Mr Lieberman said that Israel faced growing diplomatic pressure for a full withdrawal to the Green Line, the pre-1967 border, and if such a partition were implemented, “the conflict will inevitably pass beyond those borders and into Israel”.

He accused many of Israel’s 1.3 million Palestinian citizens of acting against Israel while their leaders “actively assist those who want to destroy the Jewish state”.

Mr Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party campaigned in last year’s elections on a platform of “No loyalty, no citizenship” and has proposed a raft of loyalty laws over the past year targeted at the Palestinian minority.

True peace, the foreign minister claimed, would come only with land swaps, or “an exchange of populated territories to create two largely homogeneous states, one Jewish Israeli and the other Arab Palestinian”. He added that under his plan “those Arabs who were in Israel will now receive Palestinian citizenship”.

Unusually, Mr Lieberman, who is also deputy prime minister, offered his plan in a commentary for the English-language Jerusalem Post daily newspaper, apparently in an attempt to make maximum impact on the international community.

He has spoken repeatedly in the past about drawing the borders in a way to forcibly exchange Palestinian communities in Israel for the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

But under orders from Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, he has kept a relatively low profile on the conflict’s larger issues since his controversial appointment to head the foreign ministry more than a year ago.

In early 2009, Mr Lieberman, who lives in the West Bank settlement of Nokdim, upset his own supporters by advocating the creation of “a viable Palestinian state”, though he has remained unclear about what it would require in practice.

Mr Lieberman’s revival of his “population transfer” plan – an idea he unveiled six years ago – comes as the Israeli leadership has understood that it is “isolated like never before”, according to Michael Warschawski, an Israeli analyst.

Mr Netanyahu’s government has all but stopped paying lip service to US-sponsored “proximity talks” with the Palestinians after outraging global public opinion with attacks on Gaza 18 months ago and on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla four weeks ago in which nine peace activists were killed.

Israel’s relations with the international community are likely to deteriorate further in late summer when a 10-month partial freeze on settlement expansion in the West Bank expires. Yesterday, Mr Netanyahu refused to answer questions about the freeze, after a vote by his Likud party’s central committee to support renewed settlement building from late September.

Other looming diplomatic headaches for Israel are the return of the Goldstone Report, which suggested Israel committed war crimes in its attack on Gaza, to the United Nations General Assembly in late July, and Turkey’s adoption of the rotating presidency of the Security Council in September.

Mr Warschawski, a founder of the Alternative Information Centre, a joint Israeli-Palestinian advocacy group, said that, faced with these crises, Israel’s political elite had split into two camps.

Most, including Mr Lieberman, believed Israel should “push ahead” with its unilateral policies towards the Palestinians and refuse to engage in a peace process regardless of the likely international repercussions.

“Israel’s ruling elite knows that the only solution to the conflict acceptable to the international community is an end to the occupation along the lines of the Clinton parameters,” he said, referring to the two-state solution promoted by former US president Bill Clinton in late 2000.

“None of them, not even Ehud Barak [the defence minister and head of the centrist Labour Party], are ready to accept this as the basis for negotiations.”

On the other hand, Tzipi Livni, the head of the centre-right opposition Kadima party, Mr Warschawski said, wanted to damp down the international backlash by engaging in direct negotiations with the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank under Mahmoud Abbas.

Mr Lieberman’s commentary came a day after he told Ms Livni that she could join the government only if she accepted “the principle of trading territory and population as the solution to the Palestinian issue, and give up the principle of land for peace”.

Mr Lieberman is reportedly concerned that Mr Netanyahu might seek to bring Ms Livni into a national unity government to placate the US and prop up the legitimacy of his coalition.

The Labour Party has threatened to quit the government if Kadima does not join by the end of September, and Ms Livni is reported to want the foreign ministry.

Mr Lieberman’s position is further threatened by a series of corruption investigations.

However, he also appears keen to take the initiative from both Washington and Ms Livni with his own “peace plan”. An unnamed aide to Mr Lieberman told the Jerusalem Post that, with a vacuum in the diplomatic process, the foreign minister “thinks he can convince the government to adopt the plan”.

However, Mr Warschawski said there were few indications that Mr Netanyahu wanted to be involved in any peace process, even Mr Lieberman’s.

This week Uzi Arad, the government’s shadowy national security adviser and a long-time confidant of Mr Netanyahu, made a rare public statement at a meeting of the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem to attack Ms Livni for “political adventurism” and believing in the “magic” of a two-state solution.

Apparently reflecting Mr Netanyahu’s own thinking, he said: “The more you market Palestinian legitimacy, the more you bring about a detraction of Israel’s legitimacy in certain circles. [The Palestinians] are accumulating legitimacy, and we are being delegitimised.”

Mr Warschawski doubted that Mr Lieberman believed his blueprint for population exchanges could be implemented but was promoting it chiefly to further damage the standing of Israel’s Palestinian citizens and advance his own political ambitions.

In his commentary, Mr Lieberman said the international community’s peace plan would lead to “the one-and-a-half to half state solution”: “a homogeneous, pure Palestinian state”, from which Jewish settlers were expelled, and “a binational state in Israel”, which included many Palestinian citizens.

Palestinians, in both the territories and inside Israel, he said, could not “continue to incite against Israel, glorify murder, stigmatise Israel in international forums, boycott Israeli goods and mount legal offensives against Israeli officials”.

Now that Israel has been discredited in the International Community as a lawful international actor, the far right government under Netanyahu is starting to push for a whole hog hail mary ethnic cleansing of Arab Israelis.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Somewhat related: Ken O'Keefe - American-born badass

YouTube Video

There's nowhere I can't reach.

sanctioning the voyages of Gaza Aid Flotillas is pretty serious direct action that sends a significant message to Israel.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Israel is most likely to drop a tactical nuke, maybe a bunker-buster on Iranian facilities. Nothing that would seriously precipitate nuclear exchange, but something that would still cause a major international incident and put Israel in some seriously hot water.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Iran doesn't seem like the easiest place to pull off a Mossad assassination campaign these days.

I was speaking idiomatically.

I don't doubt that there are agents IN Iran, but nuclear scientists are an extremely valuable commodity to the Iranians, and assassinating an Iranian VIP isn't like globetrotting to bust caps in FLO terrorists.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

haha Lolman is filthy Zionist scum

FELIPE NO

He just downpropped every post that indicates Israel isn't so great.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

How retarded is it to resist occupation by an aggressive and racist foreign power?

You can definitely argue the merit of Hamas and Hezbollah's tactics, but there's little doubt that their cause is in the right and Israel is the sole actor which is capable of accomplishing peace should it so desire.

Most amazing jew boots

But Israel should be destroyed as a Jewish state.

Additional Spam:
In any case, Hamas has been willing for a while now to negotiate a two-state solution. Maybe if Israel didn't create its own existential threats it'd have nothing to worry about.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by The least interesting man in the world

You know full well there are plenty of people on the other side saying the only solution is the utter destruction of Israel.

And you know full well that the Israelis have engaged in a program of settlement, disenfranchisement, and genocide.

Additional Spam:
The moral precedent for Hamas is as such: were the European resistances justified in seeking the utter destruction of Nazi Germany?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

Given that they were at war, yes they were. At the same time, given that they were at war, Nazi Germany was justified in seeking the utter destruction of the European resistance movements.

Sure if you want to look at things amorally. No foreign occupier is justified in seeking the destruction of resistance movements.

Quote:

I think they're both acting like children.

Shouting "a pox on both houses!" and likening their behavior to children overlooks the fact that it is a very adult thing they are doing, and well-reasoned. The ultimate goal of Israeli Zionism is to expel the Arabs from Palestine for the purposes of Jewish settlement. To reclaim the Holy Land from 'squatters' who have lived there for millenia.

There's nothing childish about Israeli paranoia and the view that there are existential threats to Israel everywhere. It's part of a concerted effort on the part of Israeli "academia," media, and political leadership to brow-beat the Israeli people into a forever war against their neighbors.

There's nothing childish about taking up arms when your dignity and land has been stripped away by decades of oppression and ethnic cleansing. I'd like to see how your worldview would be shaped if Jews shot your family members and beat you in prison.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

In Defense of the Nazis: War is all Fucked Up!
a post by Lord Styphon

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

Your idea that the Four Powers should have just let any armed resistance movement that might have arisen in occupied Germany kill them at will instead of seeking its destruction is charming, but silly.

Now should we continue this discussion while pretending to be civilized people, or are you going to continue to Godwin the thread when the people discussing it with you don't fall in behind your particular viewpoint immediately and completely?

Well first of all it's not my idea, you're putting words into my mouth.

I should have used the aggressor qualifier in my statement, although if the Allied occupation of Germany was nearly as brutal as the Nazis then it too would lose legitimacy.

Quote:

Unfortunately, Styphon is completely correct. Just because Nazi Germany did horrendous acts during the war does not mean they'd simply roll over and die when a resistance formed. Likewise, just because Israel is doing horrendous things to the Palestinians does not mean they'll simply stop when they fight back.

You don't understand what I'm saying. Nowhere have I said that the Nazis or the Israelis would or will give up their occupation, only that they should morally speaking.

What Styphon is talking about is reasoned justification, what I am talking about is moral justification.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

Ignoring the fact that occupying a foreign country is by its nature an aggressive act, using the words you did use, it would apply to all foreign occupiers, which the Allied occupation of Germany after World War II certainly was.

Except the Allies weren't the aggressors in World War 2.

Quote:

As for legitimacy and brutality, the legitimacy of the occupation was established by the victorious Allies at Yalta and Potsdam, with no higher power to appeal to. So far as the brutality goes, the plans included the ethnic cleansing of Eastern Europe of Germans by means of mass expulsions, as well as deindustrialization that would have required the deaths of close to 25 million more Germans to accomplish, according to Herbert Hoover.

Objectively, that sounds to be pretty brutal. The Soviet Union, which had just suffered an occupation at least as brutal as the Palestinians are suffering from the Israelis now, would have been perfectly happy implementing it fully. And to take it even further if they suffered armed resistance.

Yes, but those are all still Bad Things that didn't happen, barring the gang rape and expulsions.

Quote:

So far as this applies to the Israelis, there is an important question to consider here; just what counts as being Israeli occupation? Everything they captured in the 1967 war? Everything outside of the 1947 UN partition plan? Or the entire country?

Possession of territory within Palestine's internationally recognized borders.

FELIPE NO

I'm not saying that the Allies were saints, merely that they weren't the aggressors. By Allies here I also do not mean the Soviets and I feel it's an important distinction to make. I'm also not going to defend the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe and all of the legitimate revolutions they quelled until they gave up the ghost in the 80's.

I guess if you really want to pin me down and get a clear answer, the territories under occupation since 1967 are illegally possessed by Israel. Of course this ignores all of the Arab land in Mandatory Palestine which was taken when the Jews expelled them in the Nakba.

And because I know you like to bring up irrelevant stuff: yes I know those territories were occupied by Egypt and Jordan, and no I don't see those occupations as any more or less legitimate.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

All settlers should be drowned in the Red Sea.

Quote:

So yeah, it's important to differentiate between the Western Allies and the Soviets, separating them completely is impossible in regards to Germany.

Except they split the country into two different states along ideological backgrounds and administrated them differently.

Not that the Allied occupation of West Germany didn't have its problems.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Such is the fate of Hasbara scum.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

All settlers should be drowned in the Red Sea.

YouTube Video

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.