Gideon Levy on the killing in Gaza

[Auvergne63]

A very interesting transcript of an interview with Gideon Levy.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/israeli-journalist-gideon-levy-on-the-killing-of-gaza

Thank you, that is very informative and gives a context to this war, and a description of the attitude of the Israelis. The prognosis seems hopeless.

Thank you. He is really brave for speaking out.

So in the first paragraph, he believes his fellow Israelis are brainwashed into thinking Palestinians are terroristic?

Not that Palestinians voted in a terrorist government in Gaza and have a long history of committing terrorist attacks, even before they identified as Palestinians, culminating in Oct 7th. This is a fact and I did NOT say ALL Palestinians.

I note he doesn’t speak Arabic considering he speaks for Palestinians so the language barrier must make things difficult and he says himself his two sons don’t agree with his politics or read anything he writes.

He also believes a ONE state solution is the only resolution to the conflict, even after Oct 7th, which sounds rather like he’s not too bothered about his fellow Israelis safety or his own as he lives in Tel Aviv.

He’s been speaking out for a long time @LoremIpsumCici

"Not that Palestinians voted in a terrorist government in Gaza and have a long history of committing terrorist attacks, even before they identified as Palestinians, culminating in Oct 7th. This is a fact and I did NOT say ALL Palestinians."

I'm trying to understand what does 'even before they identified as Palestinians' mean. You make it sound as Palestinian identity is something made up recently. However, the geographical region of Palestine is recognized as Palestine in written history since 5th century.

The other issue with your statement is your justification of treatment of Palestinians because they voted for Hamas. The last election with Hamas winning was in January 2006, which is 19 years ago. Do you think all these children who were not even born 19 years ago deserved to be killed because of an election that took place 19 years ago?

There were Jewish nationalist terrorists before there were Palestinian terrorists.

The war in Gaza is another step on the road to a Greater Israel.

True. The groups are Irgun, Haganah and the Stern Gang. These groups became the IDF and one of the leaders of Irgun (the group responsible for the bombing of the King David Hotel), Menachem Begin, became a prime minister of Israel.

The Irgun was a militant Zionist paramilitary group that carried out terrorist attacks against the British and Palestinians during the 1930s and 1940s that led to the foundation of Israel.

Interestingly, Irgun was based on Revisionist Zionism, which was founded by Ze'ev Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky was sent to Istanbul (back then Constantinople) by the Zionist Organization as the editor-in-chief of a daily newspaper called Young Turk which was also founded and financed by the Zionists. This newspaper was very instrumental in the Young Turks revolution which later revolted against Ottoman Sultan Aldulhamid II and overthrew him, then committed the Armenian genocide. Eventually these events led to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

It is not very obvious up front (even to Turks as history is not taught as it should be) but Zionism has a lot to do with ultra nationalism in Turkey against Christian minorities (Greeks, Armenians) and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. All these countries, which were formed by the British where we see conflict and destabilization today such as Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, and Palestine were under Ottoman Empire control.

When do you think Jewish nationalist terrorism started?

Before or after the Arab riots of 1920?

Or are you trying to say that because the present day Palestinian Arab identity hadn’t been established then, they didn’t exist?

Terrorism was brought to the region by these terrorist groups.

Listening to the testimony of British soldiers (many of them working class) is eye opening.

No one was safe, even UN mediator Count Bernadotte (a person who rescued many people from the Nazis during WW2) was murdered by these gangs.

Much like the present day Israeli Government and IDF they saw themselves as above the law.
https://www.un.org/en/video/mideast-mediators-murder-palestine-1948#:~:text=On%2017th%20September%2C%201948%2C%20Count,by%20a%20Zionist%20militant%20organization.

I think the late queen viewed the Israelis as "terrorists or sons of terrorists" at one point and never visited Israel either.

Jewish nationalism evolved throughout the 19thc, alongside many other anti-monarchist and anti-imperial movements. Nationalism, communism, fascism and many more "isms" appeared out of the industrial revolution.

It's for individuals or communities to say how they identify not me - or you.

Any movement that relies on the subjugation, expulsion, extermination, humiliation, and brutalisation of another population for it's own existence and prosperity is evil don't you think?

Correct, and much respect to Queen Elizabeth, unlike many politicians she stayed committed to never condoning/forgiving the extra judicial murder of British citizens. I mean how could anyone break bread with people who kidnapped British soldiers, murdered and booby trapped their bodies to explode.
http://britishpalestinepolice.org.uk/polhist44.html

I am a republican and have very little time for the royals but I was actually surprised to learn this. I would like to add she made the distinction between being Jewish and being Israeli.

I am not really sure what you are suggesting here, with your question about when the terrorism started? There were conflicting promises made to the Arabs and to the Israelis. This video provides quite a lot of footage and insights, it might help understand the complexity and the dynamics at the time.

@OchaLove

Would you mind explaining what you meant by this:
It is not very obvious up front (even to Turks as history is not taught as it should be) but Zionism has a lot to do with ultra nationalism in Turkey against Christian minorities (Greeks, Armenians) and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. All these countries, which were formed by the British where we see conflict and destabilization today such as Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, and Palestine were under Ottoman Empire control.

Syria, Lebanon, etc were formed after promises made by the British etc that if the Arabs helped them defeat the Ottoman empire, they would be given independence (hence the states being formed pursuant to LofN Mandates after ww1 had ended). The destabilisation today is perhaps linked to the fact that although they were granted independence, in recent years attempted western influence has ebbed and flowed, perhaps. The World Zionist Org was I think (I might be wrong) the brainchild of powerful bankers such as the Rothschilds? It was a Rothschild who met with the foreign minister in Britain and requested a homeland for Jewish people, and it was the British agreement to this, documented in the brief and controversial Balfour Agreement, which caused the conflict with the Arabs to whom the promises had been made in relation to Palestine. I am not sure how Zionism was linked to the ultra nationalism in the Ottoman empire?

Different point - you say history about Turkey is not taught as it should be - I wondered what you meant by this?

@thousandsofdreams "Different point - you say history about Turkey is not taught as it should be - I wondered what you meant by this?"

We're not objectively being taught about Ottoman Empire history, we're expected to think negatively about Ottoman Empire and be grateful about the modern western-wanna-be republic. There is no critical thinking when discussing history or self criticization. These have changed within the last 20 years within the Ottoman-loving AKP administration but still I don't think critical thinking and objectivity are highly regarded in education. Even in academia people are highly polarized and create publications based on their side, either very pro-Turkey or very against-Turkey.

@thousandsofdreams I'm saying that in order to bring down Ottoman Empire, nationalism has been a tool to incentivize minorities living under the empire. British used the same idea when promising independence to Arabs. As far as I know, Rothschilds funded Zionism but it's not their idea. I believe Theodor Herzl is the father of Zionism, here is his interactions with Ottoman Sultan Abdulhamid II (from wikipedia):

"In Istanbul, Ottoman Empire, 15 June 1896, Herzl saw an opportunity. With the assistance of Count Philip Michael von Nevlinski, a Polish émigré with political contacts in the Ottoman Court, Herzl attempted to meet SultanAbdulhamid II in order to present his solution of a Jewish State to the Sultan directly. He failed to obtain an audience but did succeed in visiting a number of highly placed individuals, including the Grand Vizier, who received him as a journalist representing the Neue Freie Presse. Herzl presented his proposal to the Grand Vizier: the Jews would pay the Turkish foreign debt and help Turkey regain its financial footing in return for Palestine as a Jewish homeland."

Sultan Abdulhamid II didn't accept the offer and I believe there is a lot of connection with this refusal and his dethronement.

https://www.dailysabah.com/arts/young-turks-jews-freemasons-and-the-armenian-deportation/news

Nobody would benefit from anything Lowkey does except as a case study in antisemitism. He is an open racist and anti-Israel anti-Jewish activist. He has defended notorious racists such as David Miller who was sacked over his antisemitism, he's attacked Zelensky & Ukraine, NATO.

'Journalist' 🤮

I did a degree in history a few decades ago, and more recently, in relation to how DC are taught for example, I have noticed what you say. It applies to other areas of the world such as Soviet Union, there are huge areas left untaught - it wasn't so much that we were taught to look at the history positively - neither positively or negatively in fact - more that we were taught about all relevant aspects of Soviet history, not exclusively about purges, all of which is interesting and important and extremely relevant to the rest of the world. Also in relation to the subject of the thread, I see now the history of both the modern conflict and earlier history of the area will sometimes leave out huge chunks of relevant information.

I get the impression that it depends on the teacher. In the UK, history is supposed to be taught without bias. I know in some areas of the world what is taught is prescribed. And how our media now presents things is biased to the point of being meaningless in relation to certain subjects.

There seems to be a downward spiral in terms of education standards in some areas. But not across the board, it depends on the individual school and other factors. And government policy about specific areas, which changes with the wind.

On the other hand, certain specific and discrete areas of education have well funded interest groups, lobby groups. Perhaps this is affecting everything.

This all looks interesting, I will have a read later. Thank you for replying

I haven’t read it all yet as it is long, but it is very interesting, thank you.

I am aware that these are only the views of a small sample of Israelis.
The fact that they sound like they are reading from a script, expressing essentially the same views makes me more inclined to believe Gideon Levy.

They are all saying something different. How can you judge that they are reading from a script? In fact how can you judge anything? There is no context, we don't know who people are, who is asking the questions. Its ridiculous.