Newsgroup: it.cultura.storia
Titolo: Mortai "fisiologici"?

 (parenti di Abbas compresi).                                                 
 
        ... GUIDATE DALLO STATO DI ISRAELE, TORRIERI?    
L'articolo apparso su H'air l'hai letto?
E' stato postato prima della tua risposta, quindi si conclude che
non sai che rispondere.
        Perche' eludi la domanda, cara la mia
testina                          
        di cazzo, nonche' vigliacco, pronto a
sputare                          
        sulla tua stessa
gente?                                                
 
        Nessuno aveva cacciato i Palestinesi, cretino:
a                       
        opporsi alla creazione di uno stato
palestinese                        
        nel 1948 non e' stato Israele, sono stati i
paesi                      
        arabi - e questo lo sai bene,
DEFICIENTE.                              
 
        E sono stati i paesi arabi a spingere i
palestinesi                    
        che vivevano in Israele ad andarsene,
promettendogli                   
        che - tutti uniti - avrebbero "ricacciato gli
ebrei                    
        in mare", e che la terra sarebbe stata data tutta a loro
 
Leggiti un'attimo
"The making of the palestinian refugee problem"
Benny Morris, Cambridge university press
oppure magari
"The making of the Arab Israeli conflict", Illan Pappe' 
oppure forse
"The Birth of Israel:  Myths and Realities" ,la cui introduzione
allego sotto, scritto dallo speaker della prima Knesset e
ex-segretario generale del partito Mapam Simcha Flapan,
CRETINO.
Poi ne riparliamo.
--------------------------------------
From:  "The Birth of Israel:  Myths and Realities
By Simha Flapan.
Published by Pantheon Books.  1987
INTRODUCTION
...........  Like most Israelis, I had always been under the influence
of
certain myths that had become accepted as historical truth. And since
myths are central to the creation of structures of thinking and
propaganda, these myths had been of paramount importance in shaping
Israeli policy for more than three and a half decades. 
Israel's myths are located at the core of the nation's self-perception. 
Even though Israel has the most sophisticated army in the region and 
possesses an advanced atomic capability, it continues to regard itself 
in terms of the Holocaust, as the victim of an unconquerable, 
bloodthirsty enemy. Thus whatever Israelis do, whatever means we employ 
to guard our gains or to increase them, we justify as last-ditch 
self-defense. We can, therefore, do no wrong. The myths of Israel forged 
during the formation of the state have hardened into this impenetrable, 
and dangerous, ideological shield.
Yet what emerged from my reading was that while it was precisely during
the period between 1948 an d 1952 that most of these myths gained
credence, the documents at hand not only failed to substantiate them,
they
openly contradicted them. 
  Let us look briefly at these myths--and the realities:
  Myth One: Zionist acceptance of the United Nations Partition
Resolution
of November 29, 1947, was a far-reaching compromise by which the Jewish
community abandoned the concept of a Jewish state in the whole of
Palestine and recognized the right of the Palestinians to their own
state. Israel accepted this sacrifice because it anticipated the
implementation of the resolution in peace and cooperation with the
Palestinians. My research suggests that it was actually only a tactical
move in an overall strategy. This strategy aimed first at thwarting the
creation of a Palestinian Arab state through a secret agreement with
Abdallah of Transjordan, whose annexation of the territory allocated for
a
Palestinian state was to be the first step in his dream of a Greater
Syria. Second, it sought to increase the territory assigned by the UN to
the Jewish state. 
  Myth Two: The Palestinian Arabs totally rejected partition and
responded
to the call of the mufti of Jerusalem to launch an all-out war on the
Jewish state, forcing the Jews to depend on a military solution. This
was
not the whole story. While the mufti was, indeed, fanatical in his
opposition to partition, the majority of Palestinian Arabs, although
also
opposed, did not respond to his call for a holy war against Israel. On
the contrary, prior to Israel's Declaration of Independence on May 14,
1948, many Palestinian leaders and groups made efforts to reach a modus
vivendi. It was only Ben-Gurion's profound opposition to the creation of
a Palestinian state that undermined the Palestinian resistance to the
mufti's call. 
  Myth Three: The flight of the Palestinians from the country, both
before
and after the establishment of the state of Israel, came in response to
a
call by the Arab leadership to leave temporarily, in order to return
with
the victorious Arab armies. They fled despite the efforts of the Jewish
leadership to persuade them to stay. In fact, the flight was prompted by
Israel's political and military leaders, who believed that Zionist
colonization and statehood necessitated the "transfer" of Palestinian
Arabs to Arab countries.
  Myth Four: All of the Arab states, unified in their determination to
destroy the newborn Jewish state, joined together on May 15, 1948, to
invade Palestine and expel its Jewish inhabitants. My research indicates
that the Arab states aimed not at liquidating the new state, but rather
at preventing the implementation of the agreement between the Jewish
provisional government and Abdallah for his Greater Syria scheme. 
  Myth Five: The Arab invasion of Palestine on May 15, in contravention
of
the UN Partition Resolution, made the 1948 war inevitable. The documents
show that the war was not inevitable. The Arabs had agreed to a
last-minute American proposal for a three-month truce on the condition
that Israel temporarily postpone its Declaration of Independence.
Israel's
provisional government rejected the American proposal by a slim majority
of 6 to 4. 
  Myth Six: The tiny, newborn state of Israel faced the onslaught of the
Arab armies as David faced Goliath: a numerically inferior, poorly armed
people in danger of being overrun by a military giant. The facts and
figures available point to a different situation altogether. Ben-Gurion
himself admits that the war of self-defense lasted only four weeks,
until
the truce of June 11, when huge quantities of arms reached the country.
Israel' s better trained and more experienced armed forces then attained
superiority in weapons on land, sea, and air. 
  Myth Seven: Israel's hand has always been extended in peace, but since
no Arab leaders have ever recognized Israel's right to exist, there has
never been anyone to talk to. On the contrary, from the end of World War
II to 1952, Israel turned down successive proposals made by Arab states
and by neutral mediators that might have brought about an accommodation. 
  It is the purpose of this book to debunk these myths, not as an
academic
exercise but as a contribution to a better understanding of the 
Palestinian problem and to a more constructive approach to its solution. 
There is also a personal issue--for me as for tens of thousands of
Israelis, ardent Zionists and socialists, whose public and private lives
have been built on a belief in those myths, along with a belief in
Zionism
and the state of Israel as embodying not only the national liberation of
the Jewish people but the great humanitarian principles of Judaism and
enlightened mankind. True, we did not always agree with many official
policies and even opposed them publicly. And developments since 1967
have
created realities contradictory to these beliefs. But we still believed
that Israel was born out of the agony of a just and inevitable war,
guided
by the principles of human dignity, justice, and equality. Perhaps it
was
naivete. Perhaps it was the effect of the Holocaust that made us unable,
unwilling to be fundamentally critical of our country and ourselves.
Whatever its sources, the truth cannot be shunned. It must be used even
now in the service of the same universal principles that inspired us in
our younger days. 
  My commitment to socialist Zionism dates back to my youth in Tomashov,
Poland, where I was born just before World War I, and has continued
unabated ever since. In 1930, when I was nineteen, I came to Palestine
and
joined Kibbutz Gan Shmuel. There my children and grandchildren were
born,
and there I remained for forty two years, until personal considerations
forced me to move to Tel Aviv, where I now live. I became active in
political affairs in 1948, when I served as the national secretary of
MAPAM, the United Workers party, associated with the Kibbutz
Artzi-Hashomer Hatzair movement. In 1954, I was appointed director of
MAPAM's Arab affairs department, a post I held for eleven years. Since
1957, when I founded the monthly journal New Outlook, devoted to Middle
Eastern affairs, I have come into steady contact with Palestinians and
other Arabs prepared to hold a dialogue on our common problems. I have
retained an abiding interest in Israel-Arab relations, and all my work
in
Israel and abroad has been motivated by one overriding concern--a quest
for a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through mutual
recognition of both peoples' right to self-determination. 
  I have never believed that Zionism inherently obviates the rights of
the
Palestinians, and I do not believe so today. I do believe, however, that
I
have been more ignorant of some of the facts than I should have been. It
wasn't until I was studying Arab -Zionist relations from 1917 to 1947,
for
example, that I made the painful discovery that the "father" of the idea
that the Palestinians were not entitled to national independence was
none
other than Zionism's most outstanding leader, Chaim Weizmann, the
architect of the Balfour Declaration and Israel's first president. He
was
the man I had most admired as the personification of the liberal,
humanist, and progressive values of Zionism. Granted, he favored equal
rights for the Arab population within the Jewish state, but he did not
accord the Palestinians the same national rights or aspirations that he
considered inalienable for the Jews. Unfortunately, his successors--with
the notable exception of Nahum Goldmann, but including Ben-Gurion and
Golda Meir- we re not even prepared to grant equal rights to the Arabs
of
Israel, who were viewed as a potential fifth column. Instead, these
leaders chose to deprive them of many civil rights while perpetuating
the
myths that justified their doing so. 
  A critical review of the past is indispensable for the new generation
of
Jews and Palestinians who reached maturity after the Six-Day War of
1967.
This generation is now taking over decision making bodies and managing
the
political, social, and economic affairs of their respective peoples.
Their
opinions and concepts have been shaped largely by the fact of Israeli
rule
over the lives of nearly 1,500,000 Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza,
and East Jerusalem. For the young generation of Israelis, control over
the whole of Palestine is considered something natural, something that
has
always been and always will be. The Palestinians are considered
"outsiders" who aim to destroy the Jewish state or, failing this, to
grab
a part of it for themselves. 
  For the young Palestinians, on the other hand, Israel is a "crusader"
state that stole their land, expelled their people, and now oppresses
those who remain, hoping eventually to evict them, too. Furthermore,
Israel is viewed as an outpost of Western imperialism, blocking the way
not only to Palestinian independence but to Arab unity and progress as
well. 
  In addition to their distorted views and an unwillingness to recognize
the legitimate rights of one another, both peoples have yet something
else
in common: Neither believes in the possibility of reconciliation. If the
stereotypes and false history continue to dominate the minds of the
young, disaster must follow. 
  In order to stimulate new thinking, it is necessary to undermine the
myths that have determined structures of thinking. Some of my findings
may
cause storms of controversy. But they may also serve as a catalyst in
evolving new positions and alternate solutions. 
  In treating the subject of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a
discussion of Israel's foundation myths, I am well aware of the
constraints and limitations involved. First of all, I am dealing with
only
one side of the problem. I am restricting my self to an analysis of
Israeli policies and Israeli propaganda structures....... 
-- 
To reply by email remove "xxxx" from the start of my email address
---------------------------------------------------------
G. Torrieri, Particle physics group, Univ. of Birmingham
Work: 0121-414-47-01   Home:0121-472-62-65
Homepage:   
http://www.ep.ph.bham.ac.uk/user/torrieri
---------------------------------------------------------
"A nynche nam nuzhna odna pobeda
 odna na vseh my za zenoy ne postoim
 odna na vseh my za zenoy ne postoim"
 Bulat Okhudjava

 Poi ne riparliamo.
	Ho letto. Ma tu lo sai quanto mi dia il voltastomaco
	il revisionismo - perche' infierisci, dunque?
	Si', e' vero, i palestinesi sono stati cacciati
	da Israele, nel 1948: quando Israele ha dichiarato
	l'indipendenza, e' stato attaccato da sei direzioni
	diverse, e i palestinesi sono scappati per togliersi
	di mezzo (come dargli torto?). Si', sono stati cacciati
	dagli israeliani, va bene, ora prendi la medicina e
	vai a nanna.
	Ah, e non e' vero che i paesi arabi hanno promesso 
	guerra a oltranza se fosse stato creato uno stato 
	palestinese, COME ERA GIA' STATO ACCETTATO DI FARE 
	DA TUTTI, UNIONE SOVIETICA INCLUSA, A MAGGIORANZA? 
	Se oggi non esiste uno stato palestinese di chi e' 
	la colpa, TESTA DI CAZZO?
	Crepa.
	Carlo

         Carlo


 Have a great weekend
	Il tuo augurio ha funzionato...  :-)
	Ciao,   Carlo

 	a che serve discutere? Anche David Irving e' professore.
David Irving non ha mai avuto nessuna carica accademica in
nessuna università, in nessun paese, e (purtroppo) è molto
probabile che non ce l'avrà mai.
Marco
Sent via Deja.com 
http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

         dell'Unione Sovietica? Se rispondi ancora no, ti sbrano.
E ridaje.
LEGGITI I LIBRI QUI SOPRA SU COSA NE PENSAVA BEN GURION DELLO
"STATO PALESTINESE":      Lo stato palestinese non e nato a causa
dell'accordo fra Ben Gurion e Re Abdallah, non all'attacco delle
"6 potenze".


 mentre c'era un fracco di post con "pulizia etnica" e "Kosovo".              
 
:Roba da matti, Giorgio, ma che ci vuoi fare, al
giorno                         
:d'oggi ormai si legge di tutto! Ma questo č niente:
pensa                      
:che appena qualche mese fa un altro tipo qui su SCI
non                        
:solo aveva completamente taciuto sui crimini dei
sovietici                     
:in Polonia,
Davvero?   Che deficiente!
Per fortuna non aveva nulla a che fare con me, visto che facendo
sempre la stessa ricerca su dejanews sia 
luno...@hotmail.com
 che
xxx...@hep.ph.bham.ac.uk
 avevano parlato diverse volte di "Katyn".
: ma addirittura aveva cercato di giustificarne  l'invasione.
Cioe non solo "aveva taciuto" su quei crimini, ma aveva anche
"cercato di giustificarli"?
Questo postatore deve essere veramente un bel tipo, visto che agisce
immune alle leggi della logica.  :-))


 "cercato di giustificarli"?
No: non solo aveva (hai) taciuto su quei crimini, ma hai
anche cercato di giustificare l'invasione sovietica della
Polonia, tra l'altro con argomenti abbastanza stupidi,
scrivendo:
      Fra l'altro, la meta' della Polonia che Hitler
      "concesse" all'URSS era in gran parte territorio
      della Russia ,Ukraina e Belorussia che passo' alla
      Polonia a Brest-Litovsk.  Quindi non si puo parlare
      di pura aggressione da parte di Stalin.
      (Giorgio Torrieri, 30/3/99)
Ovviamente la Polonia non esisteva ancora all'epoca del
trattato di Brest-Litovsk. Il messaggio completo si può
trovare alla URL
http://x43.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=460714340&search=thread&CONTEXT=9353394
23.544735267&HIT_CONTEXT=935339423.544735267&HIT_NUM=1&hitnum=101
Ciao,


 probabile che non ce l'avrà mai.
	Va bene, correggi: invece di "David Irving"
	mettici "Albert Einstein" - e' lo stesso.
	Ciao,   Carlo

 "6 potenze".
	E continui a eludere la risposta. Bravo.
	Che molti anche in Israele (oltre ai paesi arabi) non 
	gradissero l'idea di uno stato palestinese e' ovvio.
	Ma lo stato palestinese doveva essere creato esattamente
	allo stesso modo in cui doveva essere creato quello di 
	Israele, e Israele aveva ben poca voce in capitolo a questo 
	riguardo: non poteva che accettare la decisione delle
	Nazioni Unite. L'opposizione violenta delle nazioni arabe 
	a questa soluzione ha fatto si' che Israele dichiarasse 
	comunque per proprio conto la propria nascita (immediatamente
	riconosciuta da USA e URSS), e che fosse quindi attaccata
	dai paesi arabi. Dopo la vittoria di Israele, la soluzione
	prima fattibile diventava impraticabile. Ma tu ci dici
	che la colpa di questo e' "di mia sorella": vedro' di
	comunicarglielo.
 
	Ciao,   Carlo

 Proprio non le vedi, le analogie, no?
Mostracele tu.
-Stefano

 di dieci milioni di abitanti.
Ti consiglio di leggerti la Risoluzione ONU n. 1199.
E poi ne riparliamo.
-Stefano


Uno che e' andato a testimoniare in un processo a favore dei
neonazisti dicendo che l'olocausto e' un invenzione , e appoggia i
revionisti dell'olocausto ,non deve avere nessuna cattedra
.
Alessandro