The ultra Zionists


By Jeremy Havardi
February 4, 2011
Share

For many observers, yesterday’s BBC2 documentary ‘The ultra Zionists’ will serve as further proof that a seemingly militant and intransigent group of Israelis are primarily responsible for the ongoing conflict between Arabs and Jews. The documentary maker, Louis Theroux, well known for exposing fringe religious groups, travelled to the West Bank to meet a small group of nationalist settlers.

Some of those he encountered had distinctly unpleasant attitudes towards Arabs. They believed that the Jewish presence in disputed territory was divinely mandated and that their obligation to live on the land outweighed other considerations. One might argue that they would hardly make ideal neighbours. Some had even built outposts in defiance of Israeli law, only to see them demolished by the Israeli army. Theroux correctly pointed out that the settlers had to be protected by a large contingent of the IDF who frequently clashed with Arab protestors.

He went to great lengths to highlight the sense of Palestinian grievance, including an interview with an Arab youth who spoke of his desire to reclaim all of ‘Palestine.’ But therein lies the problem. Let’s leave aside the most obvious distortion involved here, namely that by interviewing only the most hard core settlers, the less intransigent ones were ignored. (This matters because settlers are usually seen as right wing fanatics).

The must fundamental flaw with the documentary is that it unwittingly imbibes Palestinian victimhood. It seems to take the view that if the settlers would only disappear, then Palestinian hate would disappear too. In other words, that the Jew hating and Israel hating rhetoric of the Palestinian street would evaporate if only the settler ‘fanatics’ were moved out of the West Bank.

But the source of Palestinian rage runs far deeper than this. It springs from the appalling cultural brainwashing that exists at every level of Palestinian and Arab culture. From the earliest age, Palestinians are taught that the Jews are their mortal enemies whose alleged perfidy is laid down in the Koran. They are routinely described as corrupt and untrustworthy, as the sons of ape and pigs. Jews are demonised on television and radio, in newspapers, schools and mosques. It is from this visceral hatred that the conflict ultimately springs; settlements merely exacerbate it. And if settlements are such a roadblock to peace, why was it that the removal of settlers in Gaza only heightened the terror threat to the Jewish state?

Clearly, it was not the aim of this documentary to chart the causes of the Arab Israeli conflict. But in such a contentious conflict, perceptions do matter. All that this documentary will have done is cement the widespread, but utterly distorted perception, that Palestinian hatred is explicable on purely Western lines. It is not.

COMMENTS

jandrsimonson

4 February, 2011 - 20:35

Rate this:

-5 points

Jeremy....it's the occupation stupid


amber

4 February, 2011 - 21:00

Rate this:

3 points

And thus simonson demonstrates that he didn't read a word of Jeremy's blog.

Quite clearly, simonson, the Arab hatred of Israel and Jews generally is not "the occupation".

Can you explain why this hatred predates the "occupation"?


Jeremy Havardi

4 February, 2011 - 21:01

Rate this:

3 points

I beg to differ. Israel has offered to end the occupation on a number of occasions, only to be rebuffed by rejectionists.


Yoni1

4 February, 2011 - 21:38

Rate this:

0 points

"it's the occupation stupid"

You certainly are. And illiterate. And ignorant. And a Jew-hater.


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 06:10

Rate this:

4 points

simonsam, do you want, as the PA states, a racist, apartheid, Judenrein 'Palestine'?


jandrsimonson

5 February, 2011 - 08:09

Rate this:

-4 points

I don't generally answer questions posed by delusional paranoid schizophrenics, JoseAnth. But I will do so on this one occasion. Don't waste the wear and tear on your keyboard asking me any more ok ?

No. I used to be one of those two stater folks, but I have seen the light.

I want one state between the river and the sea in which the roughly equal numbers of Jews and non Jews have full and equal civil and political rights, including, of course, freedom of movement and settlement.


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 08:21

Rate this:

4 points

I don't generally answer questions posed by delusional paranoid schizophrenics, JoseAnth.

Where is JoseAnth, simonsam? Why would you answer your own questions?

No. I used to be one of those two stater folks, but I have seen the light.
I want one state between the river and the sea

So, an apartheid state, as in all Muslim states... It's clear that simonsam supports apartheid.
Note that he rejects UN creation of the Jewish State of Israel.


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 08:22

Rate this:

4 points

Tell us simonsam, did you see any democratic, non-apartheid state in the Muslim-majority states?


Yoni1

5 February, 2011 - 09:50

Rate this:

-1 points

"in which the roughly equal numbers of Jews and non Jews have full and equal civil and political rights"

And this antisemitic delusional twat screeches about schizophrenics!
Basically, you reject the right of the Jews to have their own state.
That makes you an antisemitic piece of scum.


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 10:13

Rate this:

3 points

EU working definition of antisemitism:

Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

Or by advocating a single state from Jordan to sea...

Simonsam? Any comment?


amber

5 February, 2011 - 11:24

Rate this:

2 points

simonson, leaving aside your racist pronouncement that you don't think Jews are entitled to self-determination, how do you thin it would work - bearing in mind the endemic Jew hatred that engulfs the entire Arab world?

Do you want the statistics?


amber

5 February, 2011 - 11:25

Rate this:

2 points

Why is someone openly permitted to advocate the destruction of Israel on these blogs?


Yoni1

5 February, 2011 - 11:30

Rate this:

0 points

I wish people did not use the patronising label "the Jewish state". It's called 'Israel', and it's the state of the Jews. 'The Jewish state' is a put-down popular with Israel-haters.


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 11:31

Rate this:

4 points

Why is someone openly permitted to advocate the destruction of Israel on these blogs?

You mean, let alone antisemitism and apartheid?


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 11:39

Rate this:

2 points

I wish people did not use the patronising label "the Jewish state".

Turn to the UN, please, they want to hear from you.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/res181.htm

B. THE JEWISH STATE

The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Trans-jordan. It includes the whole of the Huleh Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan Sub-District, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State. The Jewish section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat El-Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza Sub-District and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

Best of luck!


Anonymous

5 February, 2011 - 12:36

Rate this:

0 points

This comment by Yoni1 has been moderated


Anonymous

5 February, 2011 - 12:52

Rate this:

0 points

This comment by jose has been moderated


jandrsimonson

5 February, 2011 - 14:10

Rate this:

-4 points

Oh dear you don't like the one state idea , but you won't end the occupation and quit the west bank, so there can be two states. We do seem to be getting our knickers in a little bit of a twist don't we ?


Yoni1

5 February, 2011 - 14:19

Rate this:

-1 points

"Quite like some Arab countries"

Oh, dear. You really have virtually nil linguistic and logical subtlety and discernment, don't you?
I am talking about the UN deciding what the name of the country should be, not its existence per se.


jandrsimonson

5 February, 2011 - 14:19

Rate this:

-4 points

I am with JoseAnth on this one. We just need to get the 5.5 million Arabs to convert to Judaism

Or transport them elsewhere.....but lets not go there.


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 14:40

Rate this:

2 points

I am talking about the UN deciding what the name of the country

Well, your comprehension is impaired since the UN never made any reference to what the name of the Jewish State should be.


Anonymous

5 February, 2011 - 14:42

Rate this:

0 points

This comment by jose has been moderated


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 14:45

Rate this:

4 points

but you won't end the occupation and quit the west bank

Poor simonsam, you don't see any other option, do you?
Once the secure frontiers are traced unilaterally, the 'Palestinians' will be able to genocide all Jews and make whatever they want with their Hamastan or Fatahstan or both.


amber

5 February, 2011 - 14:53

Rate this:

3 points

simonson, advocating the destruction of Israel, as you do, is anti-Semitic.


Yoni1

5 February, 2011 - 14:58

Rate this:

-3 points

"Well, your comprehension is impaired since the UN never made any reference to what the name of the Jewish State should be"

Poor Jose. Your reading comprehension is as non-existent as your grasp of logic. It was YOU who quoted that document to 'prove' (but only in your fevered imagination) that Israel is referred to as 'the Jewish state'. Well, that was in 1947, when there was no other way to refer to it as the name 'Israel' had not yet been chosen. It was a reference to 'the Jewish state', not to 'the Jewish State' - note the difference between 'state' and 'State', and try to understand it.
It's 2011 now, and the name has been chosen. Referring to Israel as 'the Jewish state', therefore, is patronising and down-putting.


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 15:00

Rate this:

2 points

It was YOU who quoted that document to 'prove' (but only in your fevered imagination) that Israel is referred to as 'the Jewish state'.

It IS referred to as the Jewish State, and it IS Israel they are speaking about.

Please don't ridicule yourself.


Watchful Iris

5 February, 2011 - 16:26

Rate this:

-3 points

If you cute boys knew how much it upsets me me seeing you fall out you couldn't, in all conscience, do it .


jose (not verified)

5 February, 2011 - 16:44

Rate this:

0 points

If you cute boys knew how much it upsets me me seeing you fall out you couldn't, in all conscience, do it .

We don't care about one-neuroners, anyway, Myopic!


Yoni1

6 February, 2011 - 11:06

Rate this:

-1 points

Poor Jose, he still hasn't understood one word of what I've written.

OK, here again for the simple-minded:

1. In 1947, there was no Israel and there was no Jewish state and there was no state of the Jews.

2. The UN proposed creating one, and they had to call it something or other.

3. Today there is Israel, that is its proper name.

4. The UN no longer has any say in what the country's name is.

5. Calling it 'the Jewish state' is patronising and insulting.

Now ask your remedial teacher to explain the above to you very slowly.


jose (not verified)

6 February, 2011 - 12:39

Rate this:

0 points

Yawn! Yoni you're ridiculous! The UN calling Israel the Jewish State is no "patronising" or "insulting". On the contrary it is a justification for Israel as it is and not as the antisemites would like it to be.
What you 'explain' is so stupid that it is only to be compared with what antisemites say.


mattpryor

7 February, 2011 - 18:11

Rate this:

0 points

Jeremy:

I watched this show and didn't think it was too bad. The most cringe-worthy aspect of it was Louis's unusually aggressive and boorish manner. Usually he's much more polite and accommodating.

As for the Israelis interviewed I thought they put their case across quite well, and their attitude towards their Arab neighbours seemed quite normal given the circumstances. I was however struck by the hatred and racism directed against the Jews.


Yoni1

7 February, 2011 - 18:17

Rate this:

0 points

Jose, you really need to take a crash course in reading comprehension. I was talking about people calling Israel "the Jewish state" NOW:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=define%3A+now&aq=f&aqi=...

What an idiot you are.


Yoni1

7 February, 2011 - 18:18

Rate this:

0 points

"What you 'explain' is so stupid that it is only to be compared with what antisemites say"

Go fuck yourself, moron.


jose (not verified)

7 February, 2011 - 18:21

Rate this:

1 point

I was talking about people calling Israel "the Jewish state" NOW:

Poor Yoni, you need to understand what a synonym is.

And avoid ridiculing yourself again by equaling in stupidity what antisemites say.


zair

15 February, 2011 - 14:54

Rate this:

0 points

The connection between the far right and extreme zionists is plain to see:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00yrt35/This_World_20102011_Geert_...


jose (not verified)

15 February, 2011 - 15:04

Rate this:

0 points

The connection between the average 'Palestinian' and Nazism is plain to see.
Remember: the average 'Palestinian' voted for Nazi organisation HAMAS.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.