The Bloody Utopia of JSTREET

1 post / 0 new
Boris
Offline
Joined: 20-01-12
Jan 20 2012 21:49
The Bloody Utopia of JSTREET

The rallying cry of JSTREET seems to be gathering up an increasing numbers of support across America, with its mundane and pathetic call of Pro – Israel, Pro-peace slogan being thrown viciously in people’s faces. The shock that anyone could think of something other than a two-state solution appears enough to send JSTREET members into a tirade of accusations that one must be pro-violence if they are not pro-JSTREET. A pathetic accusation and position to defend that bears no difference to propaganda accusations throughout the ages, the chilling idea that “you are either with us or against us” or rather you are either pro-fascism and colonialism or pro-violence. Such weak oxymoronic rhetoric, at best, is bound to stumble. Apart from a very small percentage (well maybe many of those JSTREET members) I would say that most people are pro peace. Violence is never an ideal platform to engage from, unless of course you are of unsound mind. In which case you are an exception and I wish you the worst. It is a weak ploy to galvanize the eager support of students across the country and (so called) liberal minded Jews into believing what they are doing is going to bring a non-bloody end to a horrific conflict. Idealistic? If only that was all it was!
I deplore the lazy attitude of students to accept on face value a Jewish lead organization that clearly promotes its first tenant to be Pro-Israel to not see the beast behind the ‘cuddly kind’ lobby. The first priority is to guarantee the safety of Israel. The words are all there; “J Street advocates for American policies that, in our view, advance the national interests of the United States, as well as the long-term interests and security of the state of Israel.” So their first priority is not necessarily peace but the safe guard of a Jewish run Israel. As the pleadingly say “Only through peace will there be security for both peoples and only through peace will Israel maintain its existence as a democracy and a national home for the Jewish people.” However, again this is not quite true is it?. Well firstly, yes peace is a great place to start negotiations, and yes peace does generally bring about safe guarding Israeli interests and secure an Israeli state. No problems yet. But wait. Israel as a “national home for the Jewish people”. Now that starts to sound like that old Zionist logic again. What about the 1948 Palestinians still in Israel. JSTREET conveniently brushes over this with claims that all citizens would be treated equal. I wonder how, when they clearly are not now, receiving no political voice within Israel and state funds directed towards Palestinians drastically less than those for Jews. A tip of the iceberg though. Furthermore, the Jewish majority of Israel is dependent on the migration of Jews to Israel in order to keep a population majority. Why else are all Jews given the offer of a free trip to Israel. Palestinian birth rate, just among the ’48 refugees, within Israel are far higher than those of Jewish families. The result being that within twenty five – thirty years the majority population within Israel will not be Jewish any way. No wonder then that JSTREET screams that there is no time as former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in November 2007, “If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights, then, as soon as that happens, the State of Israel is finished.”
But more than that there is an obvious reason why Israel denies the right of return, guaranteed by UN law which Israel hides behind every time Iran rears its head, because to do so would distort even more rapidly the population to a Palestinian majority. Then you have a minority leading a majority. A scary thought for those Zionists out there. The very basis of their hopes are impossible. Israel will never be able to sustain a Jewish majority, its largest influx being in the post-world war two years and whenever a country persecutes Jews. So unless Israel and JSTREET want the global persecution of Jews so as to prompt their migration to Israel there is not much hope. Israel claims that other countries should shelter these refugees just as they did for Jews. Clever but unhelpful. Of course Israel accepted those Jewish refugees, its reasons being as stated before. But it is not for Israel or JSTREET to decide what is international law and if Palestinian refugees wish to take up the offer of right to return the international community has a right to defend them. Just because Israel says no does not mean we have to accept it.
“two states for two people” – an easy way to get out of that hole. I wonder though, just how racist a comment that is. The obvious example is of course apartheid South Africa. How many people would have claimed so eagerly that two states should have been made, one for Blacks and one for Whites? It comes across horrendously racist. Or during Black civil rights in the US, I wonder how many people now would have pushed for a country for African-Americans and country for Anglo-Saxon Americans? Why cannot two people live in a secular free society and state? Why must Israel exist as a Jewish state? The word fascism comes to mind; wasn’t that pretty similar to what Hitler wanted with his Aryan Germany? Furthermore, we have seen what this segregation of a Muslim community into its own country/ies has done. Are we again doomed to repeat history? Not much more than half a century ago was East and West Pakistan created, under the colonial conception that Muslims and other people could not live together, and therefore the best way and most peaceful future was the formation of a Muslim state from part of the country. The bloody succession of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was just the first of many bloody encounters that threatens the stability of that region even today with great animosity still existing between India and its lost brother Pakistan. Why should Palestine and Israel be any different. The discrepancies between Gaza and the West bank have already manifested in many bloody encounters between Hamas and Fatah. We can only expect succession there. And then there is the fantasized hope that after segregation of two people there will be all smiles and happiness as long lost brothers can finally be reunited as two different states. Separation breeds hostility, especially when the scars of the past run so deep into the history of both of these nations. It is feeble of JSTREET to proclaim to be Pro-peace when all they working to achieve is violence really. We can all say one thing, but policies that push for it are another matter. “We share a vision of Israel laid out in its Declaration of Independence – of a country that Jews can always go to be safe and as a thriving democracy that reflects the highest values of the Jewish people” . This is not a very inclusive democracy to even an untrained eye, and a clear Zionist agenda if ever there was one. I see no difference here with old villain AIPAC.
But there is also confusion in practice and rhetoric in JSTREETS most basic principles. In 2011 when Palestine moved to be recognized as sovereign state in accordance with all of JSTREETS apparent demands JSTREET moved to support the Israeli and American block. It now puts on its page that it backs Obamas weak call for borders and security first. The oxymoronic nature of this weak lobby could not be clearer. It demands and end of talks about talking and yet supports it at the same time in practice. If JSTREET wants to cling onto any credibility it should stop posing as something better than it is, another Zionist lobby in the US – just better language. “J Street condemns the indiscriminate firing of rockets from Gaza by Hamas and other entities at Israeli civilians – and recognizes the fundamental right of Israel to take action to prevent and address acts of terror and violence.” How lovely. What is the total death toll of Israelis from these missile launches in comparison to Israel’s consistent repressive killings of Palestinians and wanton expeditions into Gaza and the West bank whenever it so pleases. JSTREET demands that any future state of Palestine should be demilitarized. I ask why? As a sovereign state it should have the right to an army, especially with such an aggressive neighbor as Israel, who seem perfectly happy to blow up scientists in Iran, invade Lebanon whenever it so pleases, and threaten the peace of the middle-east consistently with its ‘preemptive strikes’ born from a fear of the Yom Kippur war. Who is JSTREET to put demands on a Palestine that has already been so destroyed? Is it that they fear that to do so would result in a bloody conflict and therefore defeating their own call that a two state future would end in peace? Under UN law (UNCHR resolution E/CN.4/2002/L.16) an invaded population have the right to use force against such aggressor, affirming the legitimate right of the Palestinian people to resist the Israeli occupation by all available means in order to free its land and be able to exercise its right of self-determination and that, by so doing, the Palestinian people is fulfilling its mission, one of the goals and purposes of the United Nations. Just a little food for thought before JSTREET brands all Palestinian violence as the act of sadist terrorists.
There is more, a lot more, but read for yourselves and learn for yourselves that what someone says in politics is rarely what they mean. Who are we to patronize the Palestinian people, dictating their fate in Washington by people who have no connection to the conflict, drawing up plans from text books and theories that serve to reaffirm the status-quo, or rather safe guard the Israeli status-quo The Palestinian people have fought long and hard for their rights, and rather than accept the pathetic watered down resolutions thought up by Jewish lobbyists, they should wait. They have waited this long and soon they will be a population majority over Jews and what, as a concerned international community should do to help, is press for the right of return. Only then will Israel be forced to concede its failed bloody experiment. No colonizer nation has stood the test of time and neither will this. A one state solution may sound idealist but it is the only, real, peaceful way forward. Allow Jews to be a protected minority, with Jews across the world still allowed sanctuary, if they so needed. But a two state dream is really a bloody racist nightmare waiting to happen, not the utopian vision of peace JSTREET falsely pushes for. Its adversary AIPAC has a very similar motto, “the promotion of a negotiated two-state solution—a Jewish state of Israel and a demilitarized Palestinian state” , hmmmm. Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace, Pro-Democracy, Pro-Two states, Pro-Justice, Pro-Human rights, and, lastly, Pro-Palestine? Really it’s just pro-Zionist and pro-bullshit.

admin: moved to forums as doesn't meet news guidelines