Zionism Unmasked: A Fairy Tale That’s Become a Terrifying Nightmare

Most Jews of the world (and probably many Gentiles) believe that Zionism is the return of Jews to the land promised to them by God. At the risk of offending some readers of all faiths for saying so, I must confess, and do so cheerfully, that I don’t buy this concept because the Gentile me does not believe in the God of organized, institutional religions. So, I say to myself, no God, no promise to Jews (or anybody else). In my perception of the scheme of things, God is the potential for good inside each and every one of us. God so defined is a prisoner within each of us and our prime task is to liberate this prisoner. But let’s put that to one side.

The Jews who “returned” in answer to Zionism’s call had no biological connection to the ancient Hebrews. They were converts to Judaism long after the end of the Hebrew conquest and short-lived domination of much of Canaan, the name as in the Bible by which Palestine was first known to the world. They therefore had no legitimate claim on the land.

The Jews who did have a legitimate claim, probably not more than about 10,000 at the time of Zionism’s first dishonest mission statement in 1897, were the direct descendants of the Israelites who stayed in place on the land through time. They regarded themselves as Palestinians, and they were fiercely opposed to Zionism’s colonial enterprise because they feared it would make them as well as the incoming alien Jews enemies of the Palestinian Arabs.

Also true is that prior to the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust, most Jews of the world were not at all interested in Zionism’s colonial enterprise and many were opposed to it. The most informed and thoughtful of those who did express their opposition believed that Zionism was morally wrong. They also feared that Zionism’s colonial enterprise would lead to unending conflict. But most of all they feared that Zionism, if it was allowed by the major powers to have its way, would one day provoke anti-Semitism. Which is precisely what is happening today. (Hence the title of my book, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews).

In reality it is how the Zionists created their state – a Zionist not a Jewish state – that best defines what Zionism actually is.

Israel was created, mainly, by Zionist terrorism and ethnic cleansing – a pre-planned process that saw three-quarters of the indigenous Arab inhabitants of Palestine dispossessed of their homes, their land and their rights.

Zionism asserts that its state was given its birth certificate and thus legitimacy by the UN Partition Resolution of 29 November 1947. That is propaganda nonsense. The truth can be summarized as follows.

  • In the first place the UN without the consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their own.
  • By the narrowest of margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was only a recommendation – meaning that it could have no effect, would not become policy, unless approved by the Security Council.
  • The General Assembly’s recommendation never went to the Security Council for consideration because the U.S. knew that, if approved, it could only be implemented by force given the extent of Arab and other Muslim opposition to it; and President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition Palestine.
  • So the partition plan was vitiated (became invalid) and the question of what the hell to do about Palestine – after Britain had made a mess of it and walked away, effectively surrendering to Zionist terrorism – was taken back to the General Assembly for more discussion. The option favoured and proposed by the U.S. was temporary UN Trusteeship. It was while the General Assembly was debating what do that Israel unilaterally declared itself to be in existence – actually in defiance of the will of the organised international community, including the Truman administration.

The truth of the time was that the Zionist state had no right to exist and, more to the point, could have no right to exist UNLESS … Unless it was recognised and legitimized by those Zionism had dispossessed of their land and their rights. In international law only the Palestinians could give Israel the legitimacy it craved.

What is a Zionist today?

Short answer: One, not necessarily a Jew, who (to quote Balfour) supports the Zionist state of Israel “right or wrong” and who cannot or will not admit that a terrible wrong was done to the Palestinians by Zionism – a wrong that must be acknowledged and then corrected on terms acceptable to the Palestinians if there is ever to be peace and the countdown to catastrophe for all is to be stopped. The Arab word for the catastrophe of the original dispossession of the Palestinians is Nakba. In my view, Zionism’s Nakba denial is as obscene and as evil as denial of the Nazi holocaust.

One thing nobody can deny is the effectiveness of Zionism’s propaganda machine. Zionism’s spin doctors probably learned from the Nazis that the bigger the lies and the more frequently they are told, the more likely it is that they will be believed in the mainly Gentile, Judeo-Christian or Western world; and all the more so when the mainstream media is terrified of offending Zionism either too much or at all.

The biggest of all of Zionism’s propaganda lies is the one which asserts that Israel has lived in constant danger of annihilation, the “driving into the sea” of its Jews. As I document in detail in my book, Israel’s existence has never, ever, been in danger from any combination of Arab force. Not in 1948. Not in 1967. And not even in 1973. Zionism’s assertion to the contrary was the cover which allowed Israel to get away where it mattered most, in North America and Western Europe, with presenting its aggression (often state terrorism) as self-defense, and itself as the victim when actually it was, and is, the oppressor.

The companion propaganda lie is that Israel never had Arab partners for peace.

Zionism has two hallmarks.

One is self-righteousness of a most extraordinary kind. In 1986 this self-righteousness was described by Yehoshafat Harkabi, a former Director of Israeli Military Intelligence, as “the biggest real danger” to the Jewish state.

The other hallmark is a shocking and awesome arrogance of military and economic power and the influence the latter buys, most critically in the U.S. Congress where what passes for democracy is for sale to the highest bidders.

On the matter of truth as it relates to the making and sustaining of conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel, I hope the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) is right: “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” If that’s true, Zionism not only can be defeated but will be.

Alan Hart has been engaged with events in the Middle East and globally as a researcher, author, and a correspondent for ITN and the BBC. Read other articles by Alan, or visit Alan's website.

23 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. bozh said on February 12th, 2010 at 9:42am #

    I choose to call ‘zionism’ “land theft with murder and expulsion in mind”.
    ‘zionism’ means that the euros with the cult have no connection with zion nor hebrews.
    probably “European invasion of palestine” wld be a better term. We do speak of the “Invasion of poland” and add by germany.
    And we cld follow that up with nato invasion of korea, US invasion of vietnam, iraq, philipines, cuba, etc.

  2. Ismail Zayid said on February 12th, 2010 at 11:06am #

    I agree fully with Alan Hart’s authentic statements about the fallacy of the Zionist ideolgy and the fallacy that the vast majority of Jews having any connection with the Land of Canaan [Palestine]. These Ashkenzi Jews are the descendents of the Khazar tribe, in Eastern Europe, whose King Bhulan converted to Judaism in the year 780 A.D.

    As to those who say God gave this land [of palestine], my response is : “Iwas not aware of God being a real -estate agent who can apportion land to those he favours”.
    And when I am told it is all written in the Bible, I say: ” I was not aware that the Bible is a registry of deeds”.

  3. MichaelKenny said on February 12th, 2010 at 12:54pm #

    All this nonsense about the modern Jews being “converts” arose in a very clever piece of Israeli propaganda, namely Shlomo Sand’s book, and Mr Hart has fallen for it hook, line and sinker! He argues that the Jews have “no legitimate claim on the land” because they are “converts”. But the converse of that argument is that if they were not converts, they would have a legitimate claim, thus accrediting the Zionist thesis of “historic right” and denying the Palestinian argument based on actual occupation! Since the “convert” theory doesn’t stand up to historical analysis (absence of religious freedom, burning at the stake of heretics, restrictions on where Jews could live and what professions they could exercise etc.), sooner or later, the Israelis will pull the plug and say that the “historic right” argument is “generally accepted”. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot …!!!

  4. bozh said on February 12th, 2010 at 1:47pm #

    it is ur conclusion that euroasians who adopted name “jew” for selves wld have a legitimate claim to palestine had they not converted.

    In fact, to me, it makes no sliver of difference who the invaders are or were or what cult they worshipped- they do not have a right to one mm of palestine.
    And in time to come, we may not find any white ‘jews’ in palestine because they abhor the dark-skinned shemites.
    Sand acqnowledges that the cultists are not a people but an admixture of ab 100 different ethnicities. tnx

  5. kalidas said on February 12th, 2010 at 2:18pm #

    Right dan e.
    your self-righteousness made simple, yet verbose, is amusing.

    With ‘friends’ like Tolstoy, Voltaire, Dostoevsky, etc., etc., etc., I have enemies aplenty.

  6. dan e said on February 12th, 2010 at 3:49pm #

    re the “Khazar converts” hypothesis: an enormous amount of research/scholarship/disputation has taken place on this topic since “Shlomo Sand’s book” was published. The whole story has many strands and complexities. One I myself found particularly fascinating is the story of the origins of the “Sephardim”, their expulsion from Spain and how certain Sephardic families became very successful & prosperous first in Morocco, later in Baghdad, still later in Mumbai, and eventually entered the opium trade, finally winding up in the British Peerage, hobnobbing with royalty & marrying into the Rothschild clan. But this is an aside from the main issue which I think can be defined as whether or not the Zionist claim of a “return” to an “ancestral homeland” has any basis in fact.

    I would suggest that anyone interested do a little googling, maybe starting with “Khazar Jewish conversion”? Look into “origins of Yiddish Culture”?

    No way I can encapsulate the mass of material I found, even just that on pro-Zionist Wikipedia, which ultimately supports Alan Hart’s general thesis. One thing I found interesting, partly because of my earlier interest in the “Baltic Vowel Shift” etc, was evidence presented indicating that Yiddish was not a Teutonic language as I’d always assumed, but a Slavic language overlaid with a Germanic vocabulary.

  7. bozh said on February 12th, 2010 at 5:45pm #

    ‘Jews’ go under other names such as jude, zhid, zhidov, jid. “Jude” label is german.
    But some of the yidish words i know appear german to me. “Stetl” from german statd or stehen [english stay, statelet], schlep german schleppen], weh [as in german weh {woe} ist mir], mensch [just like in german], etc.

    This may or may not mean that khazars have lost their language long before immigrating to german regions and started speaking it in a broken way.
    Until coming to contact with german pop they may have spoken mostly uke, rus.,lettish, polish, rumanian, and dozens more languages.
    I speak croatian, a slavic language; slovenian, slovakian, and ukrainina being closest to it.
    I am not sure that i have ever come across a slavic word or a word with slavic root. We need a person who knows yidish well to enligten us.
    Again, it is only curioso. These people have no right to a mm of palestine! tnx

  8. Rehmat said on February 12th, 2010 at 5:58pm #

    Zionism’s power lies in its supportes controlling the mainstream media, Wall Street and other banking institutions and of course West’s guilty conscience (anti-Semitism and Holocaust).

    An Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, was reported saying: ”You know very well, and stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What they (Americans) can do to us? We control the Congress, we control the media, we control showbiz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you cannot criticize Israel….”

    Former US Vice-president Spiro Agnew was quoted as saying: “The people who own and manage national impact media are Jewish, and with other influencial Jews, helped create a disastrous Mideast policy….. Our policy in the Middle East to my judgement is disastrous, because it’s not even handed. I see no reason why nearly half of the foreign aid this country has to give goes to Israel, except for the influence of this Zionist Lobby. I think the power of the news media is in the hands of a few people. It’s not a subject to control of the voters, it’s subject only to the whim of the board of directors….”

    Do Zionists control world’s media?

  9. jon s said on February 13th, 2010 at 2:48pm #

    Whether or not present-day Jews are biological descendants of the ancient Jews is a fascinating topic… especially if you’re with “bloodlines” and “racial purity”.
    Seriously, what difference does it make? Are today’s Greeks descended from the ancient Greeks? Are the French descended from the Gauls? Are the British pure-bred Angles and Saxons? Of course not. Throughout history people (including the Jews) have migrated, inter-married, converted…but that doesn’t mean that they don’t take pride in what they consider to be their national history and heritage. What counts is a people’s consciousness , their historical memory. The perception of Israel as the Jew’s ancestral homeland is not something that can be erased by trying to follow “bloodlines” back through history.

  10. jon s said on February 13th, 2010 at 3:01pm #

    The quote Rehmat provides from “Tzipora Menache” is a hoax.

  11. commoner3 said on February 13th, 2010 at 4:33pm #

    I agree with Michael Kinney 100%. Whether the current day Israelis are real Hebrews or not, they have no right to Palestine and its land.
    As a matter of fact, the palestinians, whether they are Christians or Moslems are Hebrews who stayed in Palestine and converted to Christianity, and many of them later, to the Moslem religion.
    Those Hebrews who left Palestine almost two thousand years ago, cannot after all that time just come back, even if they were real Hebrews, and murder and expell those who stayed in the land, and say we were here more than twe thousands years ago and we are back and this our land!!.

  12. mary said on February 15th, 2010 at 8:51am #

    Wherever they came from or will come from, the settlers know no law and continue to build their settlements.

    Last week I went to a talk at King’s College London given by an activist who works in one of the many Palestinian refugee camps, Aida Camp.

    5000 people live in a densely packed area in Bethlehem surrounded by the wall (hich annexed their arable land). They have water available to fill tanks for 2 hrs a week, yes 2 hrs. IDF soldiers shoot at the children who when they hear the jeeps run away. Some of the children have been killed and some injured even when playing on their balconies. Nearby is a 5* luxury hotel where the likes of Blair and company recline by the swimming pool and are provided with choice food and drink.

    This activist is a young Englishman and works in the Lajee centre where the children learn photography, creative arts and engage in social and athletic activities.

  13. jon s said on February 15th, 2010 at 11:13am #

    There was a typo in my posting . Should have been:
    Whether or not present-day Jews are biological descendants of the ancient Jews is a fascinating topic… especially if you’re interested in “bloodlines” and “racial purity”.
    Seriously, what difference does it make? Are today’s Greeks descended from the ancient Greeks? Are the French descended from the Gauls? Are the British pure-bred Angles and Saxons? Of course not. Throughout history people (including the Jews) have migrated, inter-married, converted…but that doesn’t mean that they don’t take pride in what they consider to be their national history and heritage. What counts is a people’s consciousness , their historical memory. The perception of Israel as the Jew’s ancestral homeland is not something that can be erased by trying to follow “bloodlines” back through history.

  14. dan e said on February 17th, 2010 at 2:18pm #

    thank you jon s for conceding that the Zionist claim of “ownership” over the territory they call “Isreal” (sic) is based on nothing but fiction:) Perception my keister: suppose I and some friends perceive that we are the heirs of the rightful owners of Manhattan Island who were swindled out of it. Would that give us the right to take it over by force & start committing genocide vs the present population? \
    So “racial purity” is bad but religious purity is okay? As in Whooz yo Mama?

    Oh, Bozh, I didn’t say Yiddish had a Slavic lexicon. Maybe I should have been clearer: most of the vocabulary is as you say derived from Germanic sources — but the underlying structure, grammar & syntax etc is, according to the academics who seem best qualified, that of a typical West Slavic language. Which indicates that originally it was a 100pct Slavic language which later saw its lexicon replaced by a German one, leaving the structure intact.
    Which may tend to indicate that the Yiddish speaking population group came to the “Pale” & environs from the east, rather than from central Germany or near the Rhine.

  15. jon s said on February 17th, 2010 at 3:12pm #

    Dan e,
    First of all, no-one has the right to commit genocide, never. Nor to advocate genocide, not towards the Israelis or the Palestinians, not by Hizballah or Hamas, or the Iranian regime , not even in Manhattan.
    What I was saying is that the Jews have at least as good a claim to the country as any other people to any other territory. Present-day Greeks may not be biologically descended from Plato and Aristotle and Solon, but that doesn’t mean that they have no claim to Greece. “Perception” means a lot, it’s consciousness and identity, it’s a people’s collective memory, going back a couple of thousand years.

  16. bozh said on February 17th, 2010 at 4:32pm #

    dane e,
    I do not know any yiddish except some words which crept into american english. Perhaps germna historians might know when ‘jews’ started settling germany.
    Poles, chechs, wends, sorbs, and slovaks are known as west slavs. The original ‘jew s’ were khazars who were conquered by tsarist russia. I don’t know when they stopped using own langauge.
    They probably spoke russian before polish or czech. I am curious ab yiddish; so one day i’ll head to library and see if there is an yiddish dictionary. tnx

  17. bozh said on February 17th, 2010 at 5:07pm #

    jon s,
    It shld be noted that most european ‘jews’ have chosen not to settle in israel.
    Whether it was because they knew or not that palestine did not belong to them or that palestine is one of the more poor to regions in the world to live in, i don’t know.
    They must have known that palestine is too tiny to accept great number of ‘jews’. They may have wondered that if god promised them palestine, he must have been awful mean by giving them such a tiny and poor land w.o. forests, game, lakes, minerals, etc.

    Even ancient canaanites began ca 5.8k yrs to leave the region and infiltrating nonshemitic peoples like sumerians, akkadians, chaldeans, and assyrians; which they eventually completely shemitised.

    True some or most “jews’ may have evaluated as true that their ancestors came from judea. But they all knew the land was inhabited. And they knew that pal’ns wld not allow europeans in.
    They ?all knew that they can possess palestine only via wars. Even pal’n jews, who may or may have not been judeans, did not want european invasion!

    Now, ‘jews’ living in palestine have only two choices: make peace with pal’ns or expel them all.
    Obviously, US is not ready for that. Will US allow it one day? So it is not over yet! tnx

  18. dan e said on February 17th, 2010 at 5:33pm #

    jon s: because you sincerely believe in a Tooth Fairy does not mean that one exists.

    Either the place is “the Jewish Ancestral Homeland” as Zionist mythology claims (cf Hess, Herzl, Ussushkin, Weissman, Jabotinsky, Ben Gurion and every Zionist propagandist I’ve ever heard of prior to encountering your highly creative self), or it isn’t. If it isn’t, then all claims to a “right of return” based on that mythology are nothing but bs. Such claims also may be fallacious for other reasons, but first they have to pass the test of having some basis in prior occupancy by some actual ancestors.

  19. dan e said on February 17th, 2010 at 5:47pm #

    sorry jon s but your “arguments” are nonsensical. Present day Greeks, French, British are not the majority in the countries named after them because of recent successful military aggression followed by imposition of a regime of State Terrorism to keep the prior residents subjected.
    Sorry, no stogie this time, but I’m sure a guy with your imagination will come up with another creative way to wiesel out of reality:)

  20. jon s said on February 18th, 2010 at 1:42pm #

    Dan e , Maybe I wasn’t entirely clear. Israel is , of course, the Jewish ancestral homeland , as proven by the historical and archaeological record, and by a people’s memory. Whether or not present-day Jews are all directly, biologically, descended from the ancient Hebrews or Israelites is impossible to prove and in any case is not important in my view, since I’m not a racist and I’m not concerned with “bloodlines”. Personally, I can trace my ancestry to a certain 18th century rabbi. Before that – who knows? – but that’s probably no different from other nations or ethnic groups .
    And your reference to “military aggression” , “state terrorism” is a bit one-sided and over-simplified, to say the least.

  21. dan e said on February 18th, 2010 at 3:13pm #

    bozh, let me take this oppty to mention: if you want to do some research on Yiddish or other topic, it is not necessary to begin by going bodily to a library.
    Easiest is just to open the Google search engine; if you don’t have it, just type “google” into your browser & follow the instructions. Or maybe, assuming you have a library card, just call your library on the phone, and let them tell you how to access your library’s online services. The stuff I can do free at my local public library’s webpage boggles my mind.

    jon s, “au contraire”:) you are entirely clear and transparent. But there is nothing “of course” about your claims.
    Since Isreali laws and practice are founded on racist fictions, in my book that makes you also a racist, since you support those claims as well as the racist Zionist ideology. The notorious White Supremacist David Duke also likes to claim “I am not a racist” but neither you or he is fooling anybody:)

  22. jon s said on February 18th, 2010 at 10:49pm #

    Dan e, Actually, I’ve fought against racism and fascism for most of my life, and I identify with the Israeli Left. So I certainly don’t support all Israeli policies and actions. What I don’t understand is why every other nation and ethnic group can establish a national movement , but the Jewish one is considered “racism”. Every nation and ethnic group takes pride in its heritage, history and traditions, which always include various mythologies (think of the Arthurian legends in England). When the Jews do so – it’s racism?

  23. Mulga Mumblebrain said on February 19th, 2010 at 1:38am #

    jon, where you betray the falsity of your assertion that you are anti-racist and anti-fascist is in your fraudulent depiction of the reality of Zionism. Zionism is and always was a racist ideology,a typical European settler colonial project, much like that of the Afrikaaners in South Africa. That the Zionists embroidered their land theft with faery stories based on religious mythology merely adds insult to injury. If we follow your narcissistic, racist argument, we must agree that the claims of one group who lived in the region for some hundreds of years, founded one or two, short-lived ‘kingdoms’ and who were, in part, expelled by the Romans, must have absolute precedence over those of the indigenous inhabitants living there in the 19th century, who represent those who have dwelt there for tens of thousands of years, and who include in their heritage not just waves of settlement over those millenia, but the remnants of those Jews who were not expelled by the Romans. This claim to absolute precedence has been asserted through ethnic cleansing achieved by murder and terror and decades of extreme racist brutality, including deliberate murder of civilians. All this terrorist, colonial, rampage justified by appeal to a mythological God, who also happens to be the creator of the state policy of genocide. And the project facilitated and mediated by Jewish control of Western finance and politics that led to the pre decolonisation UN giving away a people’s land to aliens. And, as Sand’s book and others have shown, those Jews who today are granted preference in moving to Palestine, as the ethnic cleansing, the dispossession, the house demolitions, the constructions of illegal colonies continues to slow motion expulsion of the Palestinians, have no ethnic or racial link to Palestine, just the mythological one.
    To make matters worse, your humbug in claiming to beanti-racist and anti-fascist isexposed by your support for all Israel’s vicious atrocities, the Gazaslaughter in particular. One knows well enough from the actions of real anti-racist and anti-fascist Jews and Israelis, who for their decency, humanity and honesty in attacking Israel’s heinous crimes are increasingly vilified in an Israel careering towards open fascism, that real ‘Left’ ie anti-racist Israelis exist,although they are regretably a clearly diminishing minority in a country becoming even moreaggressive, murderous and threatening by the day.