Chomsky has a very long history of critiques on a number of important human rights/civil rights issues – and I think he is far closer to being correct on these things than most anyone in who rules us in America. His research is meticulous and he has exposed the crimes of the Yishuv’s pre-state militias. I disagree with him on the importance of pre-67 history in Palestine, but agree with him that the Israeli state will not be dismantled by force. I disagree with him that Israel nestles neatly into the global thrust of US hegemony but instead think that a peculiar set of circumstances has led to the tail wagging the dog – within certain specific parameters regarding that country and the region.

Chomsky likely believes a Jewish state was necessary (I don’t) but we both understand that its founding is long ago water under the bridge and that an outline of a peace/justice settlement forbids any expansion beyond its legal borders. The chance of a binational state, me and the Chomster would agree, is less likely than Croatia and Serbia forming one.

chomsky is also zionist. He rightfully criticizes isr, but so do others. And he deserves praise for bringing out the facts about Israel.
but not for rewarding irgun, stern, and haganah crimes against indigenes by rewarding them with a state.

thus, his jewishness is more imporatant to him than a sane solution; i.e., a binational state.
to me, he’s major disappointment! I neve said i hated chomsky; thus it is very disingenious to put your words in my mouth. tnx

May 17 article; also cf his links. also “Israel Shamir”‘s site

I’m realizing how many there are out there who are way ahead of me as well as of the usual level of discourse on DV. I’ll be spending less time on DV and more on other sites/blogs with more to offer, but from time to time I’ll try to post some of the URLs I’m finding.

And Chomsky’s ‘Fateful Triangle’ is great. Chomsky is generally hated on this site – but more important than that is that he is hated by all Zionists for his methodical exposure of Israel’s post-67 malignant history.

Maybe Debra is rescue-able. I know a 67 year old Zionist Jew that has come 180 degrees. However, they are a rare breed.

The Jews that left the Arab lands did so after the Jews poisoned relations by establishing a Jewish state on Palestinian land. Israel carried out acts of sabotage in the Arab lands – that is, Israel sabotaged synagogues so that the bombings would be blamed on the Arabs. This satisfied Israel’s need to populate its frontier with Jews and its need for working class labor.

The Israeli issue with Jews who immigrated from the Arab countries is one for Israel to take up with those countries (where the Jews are welcome to come back, by and large). It is not a Palestinian issue but for the fact that the incoming Jews were given the homes and property of the expelled Palestinians. At Taba, Israel and the Palestinians officially divorced the issue from their own conflict.

You say, the Jews defended themselves and won the land. That, of course, cannot be true inasmuch as it was the Jews who were the outsiders, the colonizers – it was necessarily the Palestinians who had to defend themselves and their country, all be they largely defenseless against modern European weaponry and the ideology of racial zealots. BUT, if you think that it’s only a matter of the spoils of war, then what do you have to say to the one-staters here that want Israel dissolved? If Israel lost a war and was removed from the map, that would be okay, no?, as that would be the spoils of war.

For the record, Palestinians in Jordan make up more than half of Jordan’s citizenry. Elsewhere, Palestinians have not pursued citizenship as YOU have their land and property – they have the deeds and keys to prove it. And to the extent that Palestinian grandchildren cannot set foot in Gaza or the West Bank – that’s your doing.

If only your people had asked permission to live in Palestine – had asked permission of the people that have lived there since long before the Hebrews arrived and since the Jews left – if only the Jews of Europe had come in true peace, and not to take the land and evict and eviscerate. Instead, they not only embarked upon one of the sorriest colonial histories on the planet, they want to continue more of same and they don’t even want to admit their history even as their own scholars present them with the sordid details. What gives you the right?

Israeli’s do not want a two-state solution anymore than Palestinians do. This is a myth which alludes reality and parity. The land in dispute cannot be divided in such a way which would make it workable or sustainable for either party.

The use of the word “two-state” is simply a way to defer the issue. A real two-state solution, even if geographically possible, would not be politically sanctioned by the US/Israel side. A sovereign Palestine with its own military, it’s overwhelming population would diminish, naturally, the power of the Zionist state.

But even if the parties really wanted to agree on this, the mere geography, the demand for water alone would make this dual state untenable.

Jonathan Cook had this to say… http://www.counterpunch.org/cook03122008.html