Holocaust in Gaza

In February 2008, Israel’s Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai warned that if Hamas continued firing rockets, they would bring upon themselves a ‘bigger shoah,’ the word used by Israelis to refer to the Nazi genocide or holocaust. This statement came in the wake of attacks on Gaza which left 32 Palestinians dead, including eight children, the youngest a six-month-old baby. These regular attacks, combined with a blockade which deprived Palestinians in Gaza of food, fuel, potable water, medicines and educational materials, was the slow-motion shoah which had been taking place up to December 27. The full-scale bombing which began on that date is surely the ‘bigger shoah’ promised by Vilnai, and, according to Israeli reports, it was being planned as long back as February. ((‘Israeli minister warns of Palestinian ‘holocaust’, Guardian, 29 February 2008.))

There were demonstrations against the Israeli bombing by outraged protestors throughout the world as the Palestinian death toll climbed to more than 300 in three days, but Palestinians in Gaza felt that the international community were acting as mere spectators to the massacre. They were right. Protest demonstrations are not enough to stop a holocaust. Even less effective are sanctimonious statements by the UN and EU equating one Israeli life to more than a hundred Palestinian lives, which make the outright support for the massacre by George W. Bush almost attractive in its honesty. So what can we do?

Debunking Myths

The first necessity is to debunk myths that have successfully been used to vitiate all previous actions against Israel. Firstly, the myth that the founding of the Zionist state has anything to do with the Nazi genocide. In fact, the project was conceived decades before the Nazi holocaust, and was a straightforward colonial agenda in which European settlers would evict indigenous Third World people from their land and take it over. Gandhi saw this very clearly, which is why he refused to give the Zionists his support when they approached him, despite his sympathy for persecuted Jews. ((A.K.Ramakrishnan, ‘Mahatma Gandhi Rejected Zionism,’ The Wisdom Fund, 15 August 2001.))

The second myth is that criticism of or opposition to the Zionist state of Israel constitutes anti-Semitism, and is an attack on all Jews. This is not true; indeed, Jews are among the most trenchant critics not only of Israeli atrocities, but also of the whole idea of a Zionist state. The notion that Judaism and Zionism are one and the same is shared by anti-Semites and Zionists; the former assume that all Jews are responsible for the crimes of the Zionists, while the latter assume that all condemnation of Zionist crimes constitutes an attack on Jews. These assumptions, equally reprehensible, are simply two sides of the same coin.

The third myth is that there was ever a possibility of a two-state solution. There were two models of settler-colonialism debated by the Zionists. One model, supported by very few, was the South African one, where the indigenous Palestinians, though evicted from their land and herded into Bantustans, would be allowed to remain in the country. The majority view was that the indigenous population should be eliminated, like the indigenous peoples of North America and Australia. To this end, massacres were carried out to terrorise the population into leaving, a process then known as ‘transfer of population’ and now as ‘ethnic cleansing’, and ever since the Nuremburg trials considered to be a crime against humanity. ((The debates as well as the methods by which the ethnic cleansing of Palestine was achieved are meticulously recorded in Ilan Pappe’s The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, Oneworld Publications, Oxford, 2007.)) Both sides saw Israel as swallowing up the whole of Palestine, and one look at a map of Palestine/Israel today shows that this has now been achieved, with the Apartheid wall carving up the West Bank into ghettos, while the very fact that Israel could blockade the Gaza strip so effectively shows that it, too, is nothing more than a ghetto.

If Israel controls the non-contiguous borders, the coastal waters, the ground water and air space of the proposed ‘Palestinian state’, if the people of Gaza can be starved and bombed simply because they exercised their franchise to elect a government which the Israeli state did not approve of, there could be no clearer proof that Palestinian self-determination is not an option so long as the Zionist regime remains. The struggle, therefore, is not for a separate Palestinian state but, as in Apartheid South Africa, for one democratic state with equal rights for all in the whole of historical Palestine. This would solve the problem of the second-class status of Palestinian citizens of Israel, the need for self-determination for Palestinians in the territories occupied in 1967, and the right of return of Palestinian refugees, all without driving Israeli Jews out of the country. It is the only possible solution. ((See the One Democratic State Group website.))

The fourth myth is that Israel attacks Palestinians in self-defence. Take the most recent massacre, for example: it is claimed by Israel, and repeated by other politicians and the media, that it was Hamas which broke the ceasefire. Yet a careful scrutiny of ceasefire violations shows that once Hamas defeated Fatah and took control of the Gaza strip, violations from its side dropped almost to zero, until Israel broke the ceasefire by an air attack and ground invasion on November 4. Furthermore, throughout the ceasefire Israel implemented a siege and naval blockade of Gaza, defined as acts of war in international law. So it was Israel which broke the ceasefire in an act of aggression, and the legally elected Hamas government of Palestine which was acting in self-defence. ((‘On Sderot and Ashkelon,’ Jews sans Frontiers, 30 December 2008.)) This means that in international law, the murder of each one of the over 550 Palestinians killed in the most recent massacre, whether the vast majority of civilians or the small minority of guerrilla fighters, is a crime equivalent to the crime of killing one Israeli civilian.

Indeed, even before the December onslaught, it was clear that what Israel was doing in Gaza amounted to genocide according to the Genocide Convention (1948), reiterated in the Rome Charter of the International Criminal Court (2002), which includes: ‘(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.’ ((For this argument see Ilan Pappe, ‘Genocide in Gaza, Ethnic Cleansing In the West Bank,’ Countercurrents, 28 January 2008.)) The launching of rockets into Israel by Hamas was, like the Warsaw ghetto uprising of 1943, a response to impending extermination: a desperate bid for survival. The Zionists’ hostility to anyone standing up for the rights of Palestinians led them in 1948 to murder Count Folke Bernadotte, who had negotiated the release of tens of thousands of prisoners from German concentration camps and was subsequently appointed UN Security Council mediator in the Arab-Israeli conflict. More recently, their shameful abuse of Richard Falk, UNHRC Special Rapporteur on Occupied Palestine (himself an American Jew), who in December 2008 was denied entry, ill-treated and deported, suggests that only pragmatic considerations prevented them from assassinating him too. ((Stephen Lendman, ‘Obama v. Richard Falk on Israel and Occupied Palestine,’ Countercurrents, 24 December 2008.))

What Needs to be Done?

According to twenty-one human rights activists (including Jews) from South Africa visiting the West Bank in July 2008, the situation in Palestine/Israel was ‘worse, worse, worse than everything we endured. The level of the apartheid, the racism and the brutality, are worse than the worst period of apartheid;’ ‘What we went through was terrible, terrible, terrible – and yet there is no comparison. Here it is more terrible.’ ((Gideon Levy, ‘Twilight Zone / “Worse than Apartheid”,’ Haaretz, 12 July 2008.)) An international response at least as strong as the response to Apartheid South Africa therefore seems to be appropriate, and this is constituted by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel called for by Palestinian civil society groups on 9 July 2005, to be continued until the apartheid regime is replaced by a democratic one. This includes cultural, academic and sports boycotts, and a consumer boycott of Israeli goods (barcode starting with 729), as well as a boycott of companies investing in, sourcing from, or otherwise supporting Israel, and pressure on them to change their policies. It would also include pressure on governments to break off diplomatic, economic and military ties with Israel, pointing out that these constitute complicity with Israel’s crimes. ((For details of the BDS campaign, see Global BDS Movement – Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions for Palestine. The website of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN) also has suggestions for action, including signing a petition in support of UN General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, who has spoken out to condemn Israeli apartheid and called for boycott, divestment and sanctions. Information about companies linked to Israel can also be found in the Boycott Apartheid Israel leaflet published by the Friends of Al Aqsa.))

There should be extra pressure on openly collaborationist regimes, like those of Mahmoud Abbas, Hosni Mubarak, and the Arab allies of Israel, which ought to be made to feel that their people will reject them unless they cease their complicity in Israeli crimes. Enormous pressure would also have to be brought to bear on the US, which assists Israel with billions of dollars annually as well as other forms of support. Given the indications that no change in US policy towards Palestine and Israel is planned by Barack Obama’s administration, the pressure should begin immediately, before his inauguration. And pressure from within the US should be augmented by international pressure.

The US economy is in deep crisis, with more than $ 10 trillion of national debt, and the only reason it can keep bankrolling Israel is that the US dollar is treated as world currency and oil sales are denominated in it, so the US has been getting more or less unlimited credit from the rest of the world. Russia and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries must be pressurised into supporting the rights of Palestinians by immediately denominating their oil sales in euro, in preparation for moving to roubles in the case of Russia, and a common Gulf currency in the case of the GCC countries. Countries like China and Japan, with their massive US dollar reserves, should make the extension of further credit conditional on the US ceasing to fund Israel as well as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and countries with smaller dollar reserves should shift their reserves to other currencies. Such a move is required not only by ethical considerations, but also by pragmatic ones: if the credit extended is used to rebuild the US economy, there is a chance that it might be returned, whereas if it is used to fund aggression against Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan, it will never be returned. In this campaign, very little individual action is possible, and success would depend on putting collective pressure on governments to boycott the US dollar until the US ceases to engage in and support imperialist aggression. With very few exceptions, governments of the world are complicit in the atrocities being committed in Gaza, just as they were in the crushing of the Warsaw ghetto uprising,See Joseph Massad, ‘The Gaza Ghetto Uprising,’ Electronic Intifada, 4 January 2009. and strong public pressure would be needed to expose, condemn and end their complicity.

The myths enumerated above need to challenged in every forum, along with the more diffuse racism that constitutes their premise. We may disagree with the politics of Hamas, just as we may disagree with the politics of the British Labour Party, but it does not follow that we should condone the slaughter of all leaders and members of Hamas, their families, government employees, and random members of the Palestinian population which elected them to power, any more than we would condone the slaughter of all leaders and members of the Labour Party, their families, government employees, and random members of the British population which elected them to power. The fact that the US and EU cannot see this equivalence demonstrates that they are dominated by the same racism which allowed slavery to flourish and the indigenous peoples of North America and Australia to be exterminated. Where Black people are killing Black people, as in Rwanda, or White people are killing White people, as in Bosnia, there is a chance that the UN may take action, however weak and belated. But where White people are killing Third World peoples, as in Palestine, there is no hope that it will take any action unless citizens of the world put massive pressure on their governments to support a solution which can bring justice and peace to Palestine/Israel. It is good that there have been worldwide protests against the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza, but a ceasefire would be no better than putting a sticking plaster over a festering wound, which will only erupt again sooner or later. The wound cannot heal until the infection has been eliminated by replacing the Apartheid state with a democratic one, and long-term, concerted action is required to achieve that goal.

Rohini Hensman is an an idependent scholar, writer, and activist based in India and Sri Lanka. Read other articles by Rohini.

17 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Suthiano said on January 10th, 2009 at 4:50pm #

    Good article Rohini.

    You are entirely correct in putting forth the “one state solution” as the only way to peace in the region.

    My only criticism: “In fact, the project [Zionism] was conceived decades before the Nazi holocaust”. While this is true, I think it would be stronger rhetorically to state that it was conceived over 60 years (or “over a half century) before the Nazi holocaust. As decades could be 21 years…


  2. giorgio said on January 10th, 2009 at 5:23pm #

    Congressman Ron Paul took to the House floor on Friday morning (01/09/09) to remind Congress how American interference in Middle Eastern affairs only makes things worse. Here is what he said in a video at his site ‘Campaign4Liberty’:

    Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution, not because I’m taking sides and picking who the bad guys are and who the good guys are. But I’m looking at this more from the angle of being a US citizen, an American.
    I think resolutions like this really do us great harm. In many ways, what’s happening in the Middle East , in particular with Gaza right now , we have some moral responsibility for both sides in a way, because we provide help and funding for both Arab nations and Israel.
    So we definitely have a moral responsibility especially now today, the weapons being used to kill so many Palestinians are American weapons and American funds essentially are being used for this…

    But there is a political liability which I think we fail to look at, because too often there is too much blowback from our intervention in areas that we shouldn’t be involved in…
    If we look back at history, you will find out Hamas was encouraged and really started by Israel because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat….so when they served this purpose we (Israel and the US) didn’t want Hamas to do this…

    So then, we as Americans say well, we have such a good system (i.e. democracy), we going to impose this on the World, we going to invade Iraq and teach people how to be democrats. We want free elections. So we encourage the Palestinians to have a free election. They do, and they elect Hamas. So we first indirectly and then directly through Israel help establish Hamas. They have elections and then Hamas becomes dominant. So now, we have to KILL them.

    You know, it just doesn’t make sense!

    During the ‘80s, we were allied with Osama bin Laden when contending with the Soviets. It was at that time our CIA felt it was good if we radicalize the Moslem world. So we finance them to radicalize the Moslems in order to compete with the Soviets.. There is too much blowback…

    There is a lot of reasons why we should oppose this resolution, It’s not in the interests of the US and it’s not in the interests of Israel, either!

    Paul’s 2 minutes intervention ends here. Then this last punch line from my favourite Moron and World’s Greatest Moral-Dwarf:


    …..then hearty laughing in the background….

    I needn’t add any further comment. PERIOD!

  3. DavidG. said on January 10th, 2009 at 6:08pm #

    To talk about a one-State solution for Israelis and Palestinians is madness. The Israelis will achieve a one-State solution all right: one very large State for Jews only!

  4. giorgio said on January 10th, 2009 at 6:27pm #

    After I posted this I turned on BBC-TV and there were scenes of Israeli incursion into Gaza. An Israeli soldier was asked to comment and here is what he had to say:
    Palestinians chose Hamas (meaning of course, elected them). But Hamas is a terrorist organisation. So, concludes the soldier, this is what they get from us…meaning, again, this is the punishment they getting for having elected Hamas…what better is there than this pure, simplistic Zionist logic?
    Then the BBC commentators adds that so far 800 Palestinians were killed ( 45% of whom were women and children) and 14 Israelis killed.
    So much for the damage caused by those Hamas rockets sent to Israel and which ‘triggered’ the retaliatory attack from Israel. These rockets are hardly more lethal than the stones thrown by Palestinian children at Israeli soldiers and at armoured vehicles roaming around Gaza.
    But of course Israeli citizens must be protected from these ‘vicious’ rockets and child stone throwers. For this Gaza must be collectively punished, corralled in a concentration camp from which they can’t escape nor get essential goods to keep them alive. Then bombed mercilessly by air and ground forces by using sophisticated missiles…so much for Israeli’s moral high ground!

    Now I must stop this post and turn my attention to BBC’s debate and topic discussion ‘ Is George Bush the worse president in American history?’

  5. giorgio said on January 10th, 2009 at 7:11pm #

    Final result of the BBC debate.
    The motion was: Is George Bush the worse American president in the last 50 years?

    Those for the motion: 65% (before the debate); 68% (after the debate)
    Those against: 17% ( ” ” ” ); 27% ( ” ” ” )


  6. Phred said on January 10th, 2009 at 8:04pm #

    I’m sure this won’t be posted because it is a critque of the article, but I hope that I am wrong. This article makes some assertions that simply won’t work and the certain of the myth “busts” are deduced entirely through naive lenses.

    Busted Myth 1 – busted – :”Firstly, the myth that the founding of the Zionist state has anything to do with the Nazi genocide. In fact, the project was conceived decades before the Nazi holocaust, and was a straightforward colonial agenda in which European settlers would evict indigenous Third World people from their land and take it over” – I can only assume that Rohini is referring to the Balfour declaration, although Rohini doesn’t actually say this but rather foot notes a Gandhi quote. If my assumption is correct you must know that it is in fact a British governmental statement of policy. The push for Israel, a Jewish state, was only made stronger after the tragedies of the holocaust. So while you are are correct to suggest it was an idea that preceded the holocaust, you don’t actually bust any myth, but rather chose not to be entirely truthful. You should actually read the declaration, it says nothing of displacing the 3rd world people as you claim is the intent.

    Busted Myth 3 – busted – “There were two models of settler-colonialism debated by the Zionists. One model, supported by very few, was the South African one, where the indigenous Palestinians, though evicted from their land and herded into Bantustans, would be allowed to remain in the country. The majority view was that the indigenous population should be eliminated, like the indigenous peoples of North America and Australia” – This statement and infact the entire myth 3 is absolutely absurd. How selective your memory is of history and the past. In 1948 there was 2 states, however it was the muslim world that attacked, but ofcourse why mention that, right? Israel, pulled out of Gaza in 2005, tore down its synagogues, schools, homes, community centres etc…, the people of Gaza then, yes, democratically elected hamas as its government, but all actions have a reaction. Hamas’ stated goal is not to live peaceably besides Israel, but its ultimate destruction and the elimination its people, what nation would not be prudent about such a disgusting proclamation. Rohini, living in India and Sri Lanka should will obviously know of this. So the one state solution that you advocate falls along the lines of Hamas’ goals. Israel as a Jewish state has a right to exist, gazans have a right to elect whom they wish but they also must live with their decisions.

    Lets get one thing straight, I hope their is peace, and that further loss of life on all sides ceases. Please, when you engage in a dialogue do use some revisionist account of history it demeans us all.

  7. Jeremy Wells said on January 10th, 2009 at 9:09pm #

    Two articles of interest:
    1. There is perhaps another dimension to the Israeli destruction of Gaza. Read this
    article from Global Research in Canada:

    War and Natural Gas: The Israeli Invasion and Gaza’s Offshore Gas Fields
    by Michel Chossudovsky
    Global Research, January 8, 2009

    “The military invasion of the Gaza Strip by Israeli Forces bears a direct relation to the control and ownership of strategic offshore gas reserves.

    This is a war of conquest. Discovered in 2000, there are extensive gas reserves off the Gaza coastline.

    2.As a lifelong atheist, I have always thought that idea of a “secular state” with “freedom of religion” has been the greatest asset in the history of the U.S. The founding fathers, deists like Thomas Paine, all knew of the history of inquisitions and religious wars. Their thinking was an example of enlightenment

    Thus to establish to try to establish peace between two theocratic states next to each other, with vastly dissimilar resources, means an eternity of war (usually for secular reasons) means between them.

    What is possible? Here is a socialist perspective:

    A socialist answer to the Gaza crisis
    10 January 2009
    The World Socialist Web Site editorial board

    The following statement [PDF] is being distributed at international demonstrations being held this weekend against the Israeli war in Gaza.

    “The criminal character of the Israeli blitzkrieg against Gaza is becoming clearer day by day. According to the United Nations, nearly 800 men, women and children have been killed so far by the Israeli military and over 3,200 people have been wounded. Universities, schools, houses, bridges and drainage systems have been destroyed by huge 500-pound bombs. The extent of the humanitarian disaster in the Gaza Strip defies description.

    “How can the Israeli terror be halted? How can the future of the long-suffering Palestinian people be assured?

    The organizers of today’s demonstrations have no answer to offer. …”

  8. av said on January 11th, 2009 at 12:52am #

    Phred, you absolute wank.
    Just more proof in the pudding that the Zionist propaganda is well and truly alive.
    “gazans have a right to elect whom they wish but they also must live with their decisions.”..so I suppose that the right of these people to elect a government is negligent, That because they chose a govt that actually represented their needs, along with a socialist reformation they must be bombed till the cows come home, as you people continue to hold this arian belief that a Gazan child’s life is worth nothing compared to that of a Jew ..& because we all know that as soon as one elects a socialist govt [think Venezuela, Cuba], they are automatically derived as ‘terrorists’ to our yours, Israels’ and the US capitalist system..i’m sorry what you douche bags call democracy.

  9. AaronG said on January 11th, 2009 at 3:02am #

    Enjoyed the article.

    Under the final sub-heading “What Needs to be Done?” the suggestions are honorable but I can’t see them actually happening in practice. To pick one example:

    ”Enormous pressure would also have to be brought to bear on the US, which assists Israel with billions of dollars annually as well as other forms of support”.

    The phrase ”billions of dollars” just put this suggestion on the scrap heap. Sorry, but people need to make a profit. Do you expect Lockheed Martin to start growing tomatoes overnight? Also, I am wary of comparisons with South Africa, as if apartheid is history. I don’t think South Africa is a model for anything at the moment, except for cricket.

    Maybe the UN should outlaw religion. That would be a start…………

  10. bozh said on January 11th, 2009 at 6:32am #

    balfour declaration may or may not speak of expulsion of the indigenous population but most zionists knew and have stated numerous times that the home for the socalled jews can only be obtained by war and expulsion.
    churchill, who hated arabs and looked down on them, had told chaim weizmann that: “it is ok if you can take all of palestine but if you cannot partition will have to do.
    what moral right had UK to give to europeans with judaic cult a part of palestine?
    yabotinsky declares that his aim is to establish a ‘jewish state on both sides of the jordan river free of arabs.
    for long time zionists refused to call a people of canaanitic, edomitic, moabitic, and arab people “palestinians”
    UK, by allowing illegal immigration from ’22-45 into palestine have immenesly helped the cultists to destroy palestine.
    more cld be said. but just this alone proves that the euros were criminals. thnx

  11. Shabnam said on January 11th, 2009 at 5:54pm #

    Rohini Hensman: I agree with you that one state is the only solution:

    {This would solve the problem of the second-class status of Palestinian citizens of Israel, the need for self-determination for Palestinians in the territories occupied in 1967, and the right of return of Palestinian refugees, all without driving Israeli Jews out of the country. It is the only possible solution.}

    The history of partition shows regional state was supportive of the Zionists, partition of Palestine, not even Greece which is part of the Western orbit. Therefore, One state is the only solution to unjust partition of Palestine. Too much suffering , dispossession, imprisonment, deaths, oppression, racism and …. for the zionist expansionst plan, “the greater Israel.” No respect for Arabs especially Palestinians’ life.
    Foreign Office
    November 2nd, 1917

    Dear Lord Rothschild:

    I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:

    His Majesty’s Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed
    by Jews in any other country.

    I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

    Arthur James Balfour7

    When Arthur James Balfour illegally was transferring Palestinian’s land to Europea settlers without Palestinians’ permission, Balfour clearly expressed his condition for such a transfer if ever take place in his letter:
    1- a national home not a ‘JEWISH STATE”
    2-No prejudice in general
    3-No prejudice against civil rights of the indigenous population
    4-No prejudice against political rights of the indigenous population
    5-No prejudice against religious rights of the indigenous population
    6-No prejudice in housing against the indigenous population
    7-No prejudice in ownership of land against the indigenous population
    8-No prejudice against marriage of jews and non- jews
    9-No prejudice against employment rights of the indigenous population
    10-No prejudice in law against the indigenous population
    11-No prejudice….

    On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions, in favour of the Partition Plan, Switching their votes from November 25 to November 29 to provide the two-thirds majority were Liberia, the Philippines, and Haiti. All heavily dependent on the United States, they had been lobbied to change their votes.[ The State Department noted that it had been shown that unauthorized U.S. pressure groups, including members of Congress, sought to impose U.S. views on members of foreign delegations.[ The 30 countries (53%) that voted in favour of the partition were: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussian SSR, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Sweden, South Africa, Ukrainian SSR, United States of America, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Uruguay, Venezuela.
    The 3 countries (5%) that were previously not in favor but voted in favor to the resolution due to United States pressure were: Haiti, Liberia, Philippines.
    The 13 countries (23%) that voted against resolution were: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.
    The 10 countries (17%) that abstained were: Argentina, Chile, Republic of China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia. One state (2%) was absent: Thailand.
    It was basically a vote by powers, the US and its satellite, and Soviet Union with its satellite, in addition to Rothschild family’s influence on British Empire, dismissing the interest and votes of the REGIONAL STATES, Arab countries, Asian countries, especially China and India, African countries and even Britain.
    Britain where illegally gave the permission, did not vote ‘YES’ to Partition Palestine. Will OBAMA allows “undivided Jerusalem as Capital of Israel? That would be another TRAGEDY, isn’t it? Does he know the sad history of Palestine and Palestinian? Or is he still on page one of ‘uniqueness’ of Jewish holocaust?

  12. bozh said on January 11th, 2009 at 6:03pm #

    balfour declaration, whatever it says, means now or meant then, is a criminal action; tho full of ‘promises’
    zionist s knew it was fake document but acceote dby them as firts step to a state straddling the jordan and without palestinians. thnx

  13. Shabnam said on January 11th, 2009 at 6:49pm #

    Sorry, it should be :
    The history of partition shows that the regional states were NOT supportive of zionists’ plan, partition of Palestine ………. NOT is missing.

  14. Max Shields said on January 12th, 2009 at 7:06am #

    DavidG a one-state solution is the opposite of madness. Such a state would not be Israel.

    I see no sane way for a two state solution would work given the Zionist regime that invaded and set up “house” in the region. That “mindset”, that “ideology” must go.

    Jews, Muslims, Christians, Budhists, whatever can stay. There will be no peace without dissolving the existing state of Israel.

  15. mary said on January 12th, 2009 at 7:17am #

    An e-mail just in from Professor Abdelwahed in Gaza describing how a children’s hospital and a school have been bombed. The horror continues with ground troops now moving in.
    Dear friend ****,

    Thanks for your efforts and support. My family and I are okay. The
    Children’s Hospital that was targeted last night was /Mohammed
    el-Durra’s Hospital /to the east of Gaza city. Another UNRWA school was targeted yesterday in Khan Younis town. Civilans are the most suffering people. I have just heared news of two old retired UNRWA employees, Ahmed Osuf 73, and his wife Samira 66, and their daughter Areej 25 living in 8th floor of an apartment building. They found themselves through to the floo by a huge blast in a next buliding but debri was in their apartment. Their apartment is no longer safe; they left to stay with a friend family next block! Too many families have left their apartments to stay with relatives and friends inside Gaza city. Seven people have been reported dead today! toll has excede 900 and what has not been mentioned in the official reports and the media is that there are dead bodies in the outskirts of Gaz a but no one can reach them as they are in areas controlled by the Israeli army!

    I will write whenever I get a chance for that.
    *Prof. Abdelwahed*
    Department of English
    Faculty of Arts & Humanities
    Al-Azhar University of Gaza
    The Free Gaza boat Spirit of Humanity with 30 passengers and supplies has set sail and should arrive tomorrow morning. Mark Regev from the Israeli PM’s office and Shlomo Dror from the Israeli MoD have already been informed but an e-mail has just come through (14.11 GMT) saying that the Israelis have announced their intention to attack it.
    Sheila Casey’s words written last week were never more true.

    I am so deep in despair whilst this slaughter of innocents continues. Humanity where are you?

  16. mary said on January 15th, 2009 at 12:26am #

    The Israelis have zero humanity and know no law.

    The Free Gaza Movement ship, SPIRIT OF HUMANITY, left Cyprus Wednesday morning carrying doctors, journalists, human rights workers, and parliamentarians. The ship also carried over a ton of desperately needed medicines donated by the European Campaign to Break the Siege, intended for overwhelmed hospitals in the Gaza Strip. At the request of the ship’s organizers the passenger list and manifest were publicly released, and Cypriot authorities searched the boat prior to its departure in order to certify that it only carried humanitarian items. The organizers also sent an official notification to the Israeli government of their intent to break through the blockade of Gaza.

    At roughly 3am UST (1am GMT), in international waters 100 miles off the coast of Gaza, at least five Israeli gunboats surrounded the SPIRIT OF HUMANITY and began recklessly cutting in front of the slow-moving civilian craft. The Israeli warships radioed the SPIRIT, demanding that the ship turn around or they would open fire and “shoot.” When asked if the Israeli navy was acknowledging that they intended to commit a war crime by deliberately firing on unarmed civilians, the warships replied that they were prepared to use “any means” to stop the ship.

    An earlier attempt by Free Gaza to deliver doctors and medical supplies
    ended on 30 December when Israeli gunboats deliberately and eepeatedly rammed the DIGNITY, almost sinking that ship. Rather than endanger the lives of its passengers, the SPIRIT is now returning to Cyprus.

    Israel’s reckless and shocking threats against an unarmed ship on a
    mission of mercy are a violation of both international maritime law and
    the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which states that “the high seas should be reserved for peaceful purposes.”

    CALL the Israeli Government and demand that it immediately STOP attacking the civilian population of Gaza and STOP using violence to prevent human rights and humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people.

    Mark Regev in the Prime Minister’s office:
    +972 2670 5354 or +972 5 0620 3264

    Shlomo Dror in the Ministry of Defence:
    +972 3697 5339 or +972 50629 8148

    The Israeli Navy Spokesperson:
    + 972 5 781 86248

  17. rukcus said on January 18th, 2009 at 3:27pm #


    You bring an interesting point: is a socialist government a democracy? Is Gaza a democracy? How shall we define democracy for the sake of this discussion?

    There are perhaps two principles that can define democracy no matter which invocation you find. The first principle is that all members of the society have equal access to power and the second that all members enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties.

    Is this the case for Gaza? What happened after Hamas became elected and overthrew the Fatah literally over buildings? Corruption is not an offense which deserves murder, so why did Hamas kill them? Has this lead to a better or worse democracy in Gaza? How has Hamas served its population since becoming the de facto power? Clearly they have had limited resources from Israeli blockades, but given the resources they do have, which economies have flourished? Have the social services that you state is their primary objective been met, or expanded on? Consider these questions about Hamas’ role in the fate of Gaza, and the shortcomings brought on to the population.