New Knesset Bill calls for national day to recognize pre-israel state terrorist groups

Source

‘This law will preserve their heritage and will thank them on behalf of all the citizens of Israel.’

ed note–Dear God, where do we even begin?

Yes, these groups were terrorist groups and were/are recognized as such by every civilized standard in every civilized nation in the civilized world. They blew up hotels full of non-combatants, assassinated high officials, and in the case of the Judaic massacre at Deir Yassin, men and young boys were lined up against a wall and machine-gunned to death while pregnant Palestinian mothers-to-be had their bellies slashed upon with bayonets and the unborn children ripped out of their wombs.

If any other group of people had done a mere 1% of what these people had done and the nation-state where this took place then introduced a bill setting up a national day of honor and remembrance, the world would be convulsing, as it should.

But when it is Jews doing it for the benefit of the Jewish state, no one utters even a burp of protest or condemnation.

Israel National News

A new bill calls to establish a national day of recognition for the Jewish underground organizations that operated in Israel prior to the establishment of the state.

The legislation, submitted by MK Amir Ohana (Likud), aims to recognize the contribution of the pre-state underground organizations to the establishment of the state and the IDF.

The day would include a special discussion in the Knesset plenum, a national memorial ceremony, and programs in the education system focusing on the Palmach, Irgun, Lehi, NILI, Hashomer, Bar Giora and the Jewish Resistance Movement.

Image result for deir yassin massacre

According to the proposed legislation, the day will be marked on the 25th of the Hebrew month of Shvat, the day on which Avraham (Yair) Stern, founder of the Lehi, was murdered by the British Mandatory police.

“The story of the Jewish underground is taught far too little in our educational institutions,” said MK Ohana, “and as a result their tremendous contributions to the state have been mitigated.”

“These are the founding fathers of us all, those who not only dreamed but who acted: they built settlements, smuggled Jewish immigrants, fought battles, defended the Jewish community and gave their lives for the country. This law will preserve their heritage and will thank them on behalf of all the citizens of Israel.”

Matan Peleg, Chairman of the Zionist organization Im Tirtzu that has been advocating for this national day of recognition, said that showing appreciation to those who fought in the Jewish underground is an historic and moral duty.

“The underground organizations were the shield of the Yishuv, and were crucial in bringing about the establishment of the state after 2,000 years of exile,” said Peleg.

“These people were visionaries without whom we would not be here,” continued Peleg. “It is our historic and moral obligation to show them thanks and appreciation, and it is astounding that such a day has yet to be established.”

Advertisements

Achieving a Palestinian Right Of Return

February 15, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

right-of-return-copy.jpg

By Eve Mykytyn

The Middle East Monitor reported this week that The Committee of the March of Return has announced that Palestinian refugees will start peace marches towards Israel to return to their homes. The Monitor quotes the Committee:

“The 1948 war ended 70 years ago and there is no reason that refugees should remain away from their homes…returning is your right…There is no longer any point in waiting for just political solutions that will return the refugees to their homes or prevent the occupation from settlement, land confiscation, repeated aggression and siege.”

For most Americans whose exposure to the conflict has been limited to Israel’s version, this may seem surprising. Zionists have been inordinately successful in controlling the narrative in the US. I can’t think of another conflict in which, for so long, the victors got away with blaming the indigenous people whom they ousted.

It may be that the only effective option the Palestinians have to regain their land is to return to their property. The act of reclaiming their property puts the lie to Israel’s claim that it was never Palestinian property to begin with.

Instead, under its law of return, Israel offers citizenship to all Jews, their spouses, children and grandchildren. This is a law like no other, since Jews are not defined by religion or place of birth; it is purely and openly race-based.

How can Zionism justify  taking  land from Palestinians and offering it to any Jew?  First there is the somewhat tortured biblical explanation. For the secular and political, the Zionist narrative relies upon the supposed nonexistence of Palestinians  and with Palestinians ‘running away’ and thereby somehow losing rights to land. (Presumably this logic does not apply to holocaust survivors who fought relentlessly to get back their assets.) Leaving aside the falsity of these allegations, even if true, do they really matter?  Seventy years ago and ever since, Israel has claimed land belonging to others.

A peaceful return by Palestinian refugees will likely disrupt the flow of Israel’s depiction of itself as the victim and place the Palestinians in their rightful place as the ousted owners of the land.

This is a dangerous situation. Nothing Israel has done in the 70 years of its existence indicates that Israel will voluntarily relinquish land to the Palestinians. We can assume that those who profited from stolen goods in World War II would not have returned a thing had those with ownership claims not asserted them. Similarly, and much more crucially, Palestinians have no hope to regain any of their property without asserting ownership.

I would not be so brave. There is no doubt that such Palestinian action will be met with violence. I’ve always wondered at the bravery of those who effect this kind of change. History is replete with scenes of masses of civilians fighting heavily armed soldiers. I wonder, how can their leaders urge them to battle when so many will die? I think I am beginning to understand. Their circumstances are such that change may never come about in any other way.

For years, Palestinians have protested by martyring themselves, attacking Israelis, joining the knesset, boycotting Israeli goods, etc. These techniques have had limited success. Palestinians have been ‘allowed’ ever decreasing freedoms and land. I don’t envy the Palestinians their battle.

The Banality of Good Pt. 5 – Pre TSD, Zionism and Empire

February 01, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

eistein Palestine_edited-1.jpg

 By Clara S and Gilad Atzmon

Clara:   After having read Exodus as a teenager I was convinced that after the Holocaust finding a new home in Israel and fighting anyone who threatened their existence was quite an understandable reaction of the Jewish people.

Gilad: Do you mean killing Arabs and taking their land in the name of Jewish suffering?  If this is what you mean, you should bear in mind that Arabs and Palestinians in particular had nothing to do with Jewish suffering. In fact, in Palestine and in the Arab world Jews were living in peace and harmony with their Muslim and Christian neighbours.

As I explained before, with a manifestation of Pre TSD the so-called ‘victims’ envisage an imaginary hostile reality. The only way to prevail is, to act first, to fight anyone who might be in the way. Next we see the erection of ghetto walls, the prospect of peace and harmony evaporate. In short, welcome to the contemporary dystopia.

Israelis today, for instance, are genuinely tormented by a future nuclear conflict with Iran.  Yet, instead of resolving this volatile situation trying to calm the tension, Israeli politics and Jewish Lobby activity actually escalate this tension. The reality on the ground is devastating. The entire region is under a threat of a war that can easily deteriorate into a nuclear conflict.

Zionism was initially a promise to ‘civilize’ the Diaspora Jews by means of ‘homecoming.’  We, I include myself in order to simplify the argument, were supposed to evolve into ‘people like all other people.’ This surely meant living in peace with our neighbours. This project clearly failed.

We are told by most anti Zionists that Zionism hijacked Judaism. I believe that the facts on the ground suggest that it is (almost) the other way around.

Zionism that was initially an anti Jewish movement (some would say anti-Semitic) was hijacked by Jewishness (as opposed to Judaism). It was once again the chosenness (Jewish exceptionalism) that abolished the initial affinity towards the universal. It was Jewishness that guaranteed that Israelis would be unlike any other people. It was Jewishness that retained chosenness at the core of the Zionist thought.  By the way, this exceptionalist shift within early Zionism was subject to a vivid debate.

Clara:   Wasn’t Einstein still an old-school Zionist, when he wrote to Chaim Weizmann in 1929 that if Jews could not coexist peacefully with Arabs, “then we have learned absolutely nothing during our 2,000 years of suffering?”

 Gilad: Indeed and this is the crux of the matter. Einstein realised already in 1929 that hostility towards the indigenous is sadly embedded in Jewish culture. Einstein could see as early as 1929 that the Zionist movement was already making the Palestinians into the new Goyim.  This was probably devastating for him and it clearly produces a devastating understanding of the Jewish continuum.

 Clara:   You argue that it has basically been the belief in their chosenness which has led to the many disasters in Jewish history.

Now this is not a Jewish ‘speciality’. I have always been wondering how Europeans (and later US-Americans as well) felt entitled to conquer the world, to take the land, exploit the resources and manpower, impose their culture and religion on foreign peoples and killing them when they were in the way. This feeling of racial and cultural superiority has always puzzled me. And it wasn’t and isn’t only greed. Many of us were and are true believers in the mission of promoting ‘western values’ all over the world be it for religious or secular reasons. And even those of us who are critical of what is going on still tend to display a kind of colonialist attitude. I admit I have been asking myself more than once ‘What is it in Christianity and western culture as a whole that has made it so disastrous for the world?’

Gilad: Let us closely examine the notions of chosenness. To start with chosenness is not necessarily a bad thing. It becomes a bad thing when you celebrate your chosenness on the expense of the other.  For orthodox Jews Judaic chosenness is interpreted as a moral burden. It is the duty to serve the world with an exemplary ethical behaviour (please do not ask me how many orthodox Jews follow the above). While in Judaism chosenness can be interpreted as a moral duty, in secular Jewish culture it is often realised as a sense of exceptionalism that is racially oriented. The Zionists, for instance, believe that they can ‘return’ to a land after 2000 years and to reinstate their Biblical reign of power. Let me assure you, not many Italians claim for acres in Britain based on the Roman’s reign in the land more or less around the same time. But the anti Zionists are following exactly the same path. The Jewish pro Palestinian activists do believe that they are in a very special position within the Palestinian Solidarity Movement. They are the ones who give the rest of us a “kosher stamp.“ The Jewish anti Zionists have in practice established a realm of Jewish privilege at the core of the discourse that is set to fight the supremacist abuse invoked by their brethren.   I came to the conclusion that Jewish ID politics is basically a collection of different ideas that facilitate self love.

However, you are correct. European colonialism, Slavery, British imperialism and contemporary Ziocons are all forms of chosenism. The problem that we face with Zionism or Israeli brutality is that it celebrates that form of exceptionalism in front of our eyes, yet, we can’t really talk about it.

Clara:   So the real tragedy is that, if Israel’s enemies united and if they defeated the country, all the fears would come true – the self-fulfilling prophecy of a new ‘Holocaust’, which could have been prevented by true ‘self love’, learning from the past and making peace in time.

Gilad: I feel very comfortable with that. Israel defines itself as the Jewish State. If we want to grasp the actions of Israel, its lobbies and world Jewry we must dig into the meanings of Jewishness and Judaism, we must ask who are the Jews. We must delve into Jewish culture and ideology. We should become familiar with Jewish survival strategies.

Clara:   Speaking of unveiling Jewish lobbies: You have just mentioned contemporary ‘Ziocons’. What or who do you mean by that?

 Gilad: Zioncons are those Neocons who send young American and Brits to die for Zion in the name of Coca Cola.

Clara:   For Zion? They fought/fight in Afghanistan, Iraq, some in Syria, it’s an empire of more than 760 military bases worldwide …

 Gilad:   Pretty much so. Zionism is no longer a geographically limited nationalist ideology. I often argue that the Neocon school points at a clear global shift from ‘a promised land’ to ‘a promised planet.’

Clara:   So that without the Neocons the state of Israel would not be so strong and powerful, look at Trump’s support of making Jerusalem the capital of Israel? And without the support and lobbying of rich and powerful Zionists the Neocons couldn’t control US-American politics the way they do?

 Gilad:  I wish I could say that. As I write these lines I read about Bibi Netanyahu successful visit in India. Israeli strategists know that America is on its way down. They are already zigzagging their way into the corridors of power of the new emerging powers. Russia, India and China.

Clara:   At one point you ask in ‘The Wandering Who’ (p.25, kindle edition) „How did America allow itself be enslaved by ideologies inherently associated with foreign interests?” Another one of your ‘anti-Semitic’ sayings.

 Gilad: Indeed this silence of American political establishment, media and academia demands our intellectual attention. I often argue that Jewish power is the power to suppress discussion on Jewish power. I believe that the 1st step in the right direction is to unveil the meaning of this power, to grasp that which they work hard to conceal and suppress.

Clara:   Could we see the Neocons and the Zionists as two not necessarily very brotherly siblings with similar mindsets working together against a multipolar world? A world where nations solve their collisions of interests in peaceful negotiations with respect to international law? A world where the people living in a country are more important than the wish to control some distant part of the world or the supposed interests of Israel? I have found that for many issues I am concerned with I have to talk about the American Empire. But since the Neocon –dominated Empire is entangled with Zionism, and because Jewish elites are mixed up not only with Israeli politics but with the politics of Empire, criticising these kinds of policies is still very difficult: as soon as you touch Jewish or Israeli influence the question of being a Nazi or an anti-Semite lingers behind every corner. It is hard to think straight in such an environment!

Gilad:  Once we break out of the tyranny of correctness we grasp that Neocons are practically Ziocons, in other words, the Neocons and the Zionists are one. Why is it so difficult to discuss it? Because Jewish power is the power to silence criticism of Jewish power.  Jewish power is maintained by the so called ‘Left’ (new Left really) I will prove it to you. Who was it who tried to silence you recently when you questioned the campaign against Atzmon, was it the Zionist federation, the Israeli embassy? Not really, it was the so-called  ‘lefty’ Rubikon and the ‘anti’ Zionist Elias Davidsson. Let me tell you, we are now very close to the bone.  A continuum has been established.

If they want to burn it, you want to read it …

cover bit small.jpg

The Banality of Good pt. 2: Blaming the Victim?

January 26, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

blaming the victim.jpg

Blaming the Victim? 

By Clara S. and Gilad Atzmon

To read part 1 http://www.gilad.co.uk/

German: https://opablog.net

Clara:   You know, when I saw the pictures of the kids killed in Gaza while playing on the beach in 2014, I was shocked again. But I was told to accept that these people had brought their fate upon themselves using their kids as human shields. Hadn’t I heard that before? Didn’t the Nazis say the Jews deserved to die because they had brought so much evil upon the world?

And you have just told me, that the Holocaust survivors were treated kind of the same by their fellow-citizens.

So here’s my next question: When I read your book I couldn’t help to think,
“Does Gilad really want to say that the Jews were responsible themselves for what had happened to them”? 

In chapter 21 you write: “65 years after the liberation of Ausschwitz we should be able to ask – why? Why were the Jews hated? Why did European people stand up against their neighbours”? (The Wandering Who?)

Isn’t that just like telling a victim of rape that she should have dressed more properly or stayed at home altogether? That is outrageous!

Gilad: ‘Don’t blame the victim’ is a popular, however problematic, proclamation. It begs for attention. We must ask some crucial questions who and what is a victim? What forms victimhood? What are the circumstances in which a crime is taking place? As you may imagine, I actually gave a lot of thought to these questions.  The ethical judgment here is far from being a universal algorithm. On the contrary, it is the particularity of the judgment that aspires at a universal maxim instead.

Let’s for instance examine the case of young woman X who was raped in the park in the middle of the night. She was subject to sexual assault something she didn’t consent to. The case of a rape is established. X was a victim. However, we also learn that X made a conscious decision to cross the park half naked, in the middle of the night, knowing that this given park is known for its bad reputation as far as sex predatory activity is concerned. Will you agree that while X is a victim of a rape, she, to a certain extent, brought it on herself?  She took an unreasonable risk.  And what would you say about X if you learned that she has been raped in the same spot on a regular basis five times a week for the last two decades? X is still a victim, those who rape her are still criminals, yet would you be interested to examine X’s mental making?

The case of Jews, Jewry and Jewish history is actually different altogether.  To start with, we are dealing with an ethnic group (as opposed to an individual).  Furthermore, I myself do not deal with people; Moshe, Yossef or Yaakov. I deal instead with ideology, culture and politics. The answer to the questions ‘Why were the Jews hated? Or why did European people stand up against their neighbours?’ led me to a study of the culture, the ideology and the politics that form Jewish identity. I ask ‘what is it in Jewish culture, ID politics and ideology that evokes animosity in so many different places and different times in history’?
I do believe, and this is fundamental to my work, that Jews like all other people are born innocent. I argue that some elements in Jewish culture, such as tribal chosenness, have made things complicated for many Jews all along Jewish history.

Clara:    Wait a moment: of course this victim isn’t acting very sensibly. But still, I hold to it that I want to live in surroundings where my safety is secured and I do not have to expect that kind of “activity”, no matter how eccentric I may be …

Gilad: This is somehow more fundamental than just being eccentric.

I believe that since Jewish history is a chain of disasters, we must understand once and for all ‘what is it in Jewish culture, politics and ideology that puts Jews, the people, at risk’. By the way, I didn’t invent this question. It is this question exactly that initiated the Zionist movement. It was thinkers like Bernard Lazare who elaborated on the Jewish question in an attempt to grasp, once and for all ‘why the Jews?’ The difference between early Zionists (Herzl, Lazare, Borochov, Nordau etc.)  and myself is that early Zionists believed that Jews could be morphed collectively into something else.  I am not sure that this is the case. I am not convinced that there is a collective solution to the Jewish question. I believe that some break out as individuals. I hope that I, myself, have managed.

Clara:   It’s also what communists tend to believe in, that they can forge a new and better kind of human being. I used to think that way, too. Today I have some doubts about how realistic that idea is.
But back to the question of ‘blaming the victim’ once more:It is a well-established fact that victims of abuse tend to seek the reason for what has happened to them in themselves. The guilt they feel is a way of finding a meaning in the egregious things they had to suffer, of trying to control the uncontrollable. Aren’t you doing exactly the same?

Gilad:   I certainly do.  I believe that considering Jewish history being a chain of disasters, Jews must examine themselves by means of self reflection instead of accusing the Goyim. As you know, I am a follower of the Austrian philosopher Otto Weininger who revealed to us that in art self realization is realization of the world. The more I look into myself, the better I understand the world around me.

Clara:    Well, I’m not sure. Many victims blame themselves for things they are 100% not guilty of. That is not a healthy way to cope with traumatic experiences.

 Gilad:   Who decides? How do we figure out the exact percentage of our accountability? Should we care about such percentage? I actually believe that understanding reality in categorical terms is way more helpful. Examining, for instance, the case of X may reveal that being a rape victim satisfies X’s needs. I guess that you can extend this analogy as you wish.

Clara:    If it were that way, we would indeed have to think about X’s frame of mind. But for us who do not draw satisfaction from being a victim it maybe all comes down to the question of responsibility. To take responsibility for the things I can change and to accept that there are a lot of things I cannot. It’s hard enough for an individual to find out which is which. Can a group go through such a process? Having started and lost two world wars the Germans as a collective have been blamed and blaming themselves for all the bad things which happened to them as a result. Now some people have started questioning whether the shock and awe tactics of bombing Dresden and other cities really was necessary to win the war (not to forget the atomic bombs which destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki). My mother, for example, lost everything she had during the bombing of Leipzig, luckily no one in the family was killed. But this is seen by others as an attempt of justifying the atrocities committed by my people.

However, if an individual like yourself claims to take responsibility for a whole group, the other members might not be amused. No wonder that some of your fellow Jews call you a well-poisoner.

Gilad:   I do not think that those people are my ‘fellow Jews’ for I haven’t been a Jew for many years and they aren’t exactly my fellows.  Rather than blaming Jews I ask Jews to look into their culture, ideology and politics and ask themselves why? Why pogroms, the Holocaust, anti-Semitism?  Zionism promised to transform the Jews, to make them loved, it failed miserably, why? If Jews are struggling to come with an answer, as I mention before, early Zionism is a good start. I, once again recommend the work of LazareBorochovEhad Ha’am and even Herzl. Responsibility, if you wish, starts with self reflection.

Clara:   So how would you describe yourself if not as a Jew?

Gilad: To start with I avoid any form of political identification … I am a jazz artist, I am a writer, I am British, I am an ex Jew and ex Israeli, I follow the message of Christ but do not follow any organized religion.

If they want to burn it, you want to read it …

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, 

Amazon.co.uk  ,  Amazon.com  and   here  (gilad.co.uk). 

Antisemitsm- Reality or Merely Statistics?

January 23, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

antisemitsm pretsd.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Last weekend, the Israeli press gave the impression that a new global pogrom is going  to burst any minute.  “Hike in worldwide anti-Jewish incidents” was Israel’s Ynetnews headline.

Early on Sunday, the Israeli Ministry of Diaspora Affairs released the ‘2017 Anti-Semitism Report,’ which showed a “substantial increase in racist incidents against Jews in Europe, especially in the western parts of the continent.”

According to the report, “2017 saw a 78% increase in incidents of physical violence against Jews in the UK and a 30% increase in all anti-Semitic incidents in the country.” We learned about an increase in the number of anti-Semitic incidents in Germany. A study of Central and Eastern European countries revealed that “20% of the respondents did not want Jews in their country and 30% did not want Jews as neighbours. In addition, 22% of Romania’s citizens and 18% of Polish citizens were interested in denying the right of Jews to citizenship in their country.”

Reportedly, Diaspora Jews are shaken by the alleged rise in antisemitsm. Ahead of International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the World Zionist Organisation revealed that 83% of those surveyed reported that they were exposed to anti-Semitism on the Internet and on social media, 59% believe that the politicians in their country are anti-Semitic at least to some extent and 51% of respondents said they were afraid to wear Jewish symbols in public.

Now, let me assure you, I do not buy any of the above. I am not impressed by Zionist statistics and I am not alone. In Britain for instance, the Crown Prosecution Service is sceptical about the validity of the above statistics.  But let’s assume for a moment that all these figures are factually valid and statistically accurate. The article still fails to ask the 6 million dollar question — Why? Why are Jews once again hated?

Naturally, the Palestinians are available to be blamed. “It further claimed that there is ongoing anti-Semitic incitement by the Palestinian Authority: Systematic use of religious and other anti-Semitic narratives to foster hatred of Israelis and Jews among its citizens.” If you are bewildered by the above statement wait till you read the ‘rationale.’  Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, is quoted as  saying the following during a meeting of the PLO’s Central Committee: “Israel is a colonial project that has nothing to do with the Jews.”

Abbas’s statement may be right or wrong. It is, however, the opposite of anti-Semitic incitement. It absolves the Jews of the crimes committed by the state that calls itself “The Jewish State.”

I will try to help Naftali Bennett and his Ministry of Diaspora Affairs.

If you are genuinely concerned about antisemitsm and  the high percentage of Eastern Europeans who do not want to live in proximity to Jews, you may want to also try to find out what percentage of Israeli Jews are happy to live next to Arab neighbours. Try to ascertain the percentage of ‘Diaspora Jews’ in New York’s Kiryas Joel or London’s Golders Green who are willing to  live alongside Goyim.  Before Minister  Bennett complains about the Poles who don’t want Jewish citizens in their country, he should share with us his personal views regarding the prospect of Israel becoming a ‘state of its citizens’ as opposed to ‘The Jewish State.’

Perhaps when Bennett, The Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, and other Jewish institutions are brave enough to  reflect upon these questions, antisemitsm might  evaporate and more importantly, Jews may stop being fearful of their neighbours. They won’t have reason; at last they will love their neighbours and be loved in return.

If they want to burn it, you want to read it …

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, 

Amazon.co.uk  ,  Amazon.com  and   here  (gilad.co.uk). 

Likud Party Votes to Annex West Bank

 December 31, 2017

Likud vote

The Likud Central Committee voted Sunday to unanimously accept a resolution that calls on the party’s leaders to move to formally annex the West Bank.

The vote by the ruling party is nonbinding and was called for in a letter signed by some 900 members of the central committee.

Most of the Likud ministers in the government support the resolution.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was not present at the event, but over 1,000 people attended, including former education minister and Netanyahu rival Gideon Sa’ar, who called on Likud to support the move.

“It is going to happen in a few years. Let us lead Likud. All big historical moves were led by Likud and it is our generation’s goal to remove any question mark looming over the future of the settlements,” Sa’ar said.

In the past, Netanyahu would have prevented such meetings being called to discuss ideological issues, saying it had a diplomatic cost overseas while having little significance in the Zionist entity. This time, though, he chose not to intervene.

SourceIsraeli media

Related Videoes

Related Articles

S. Nasrallah Says Trump Quds Decision Blatant Aggression, Calls for Mass Rally in Dahiyeh

Marwa Haidar

Sayyed Quds

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah sounded alarm on Thursday over US President Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Al-Quds as Israeli capital, calling for a mass rally in Beirut’s southern suburb (Dahiyeh) next week in solidarity with the holy city.

During a televised speech via Al-Manar, Sayyed Nasrallah said that Hezbollah supports Palestinian resistance movements’ calls for a new Intifada in response Trump’s move.

His eminence said Israeli officials expect that all reactions to Trump’s decision by Arabs and Muslims are futile, but stressed that all Arabs and Muslims bear responsibility regarding the latest move by the US administration.

Hezbollah S.G. called on Palestinian factions to announce that the so-called peace talks with the Zionist entity are over, stressing that ending all aspects of normalization between Arab states and the Zionist regime is the least reactions to what he described “blatant aggression” against Palestine, its people, holy sites and identity.

Dangers of Trump Decision

Sayyed Nasrallah started his speech by talking about the dangers posed by Donald Trump decision to recognized Al-Quds as Israeli capital and his order to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to the holy city.

“After a hundred years, we feel that we are before another Balfour Declaration,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that the Zionist regime doesn’t respects international resolutions.

Sayyed Nasrallah pointed to the US stance towards the Israeli rush to implement its plot to Judaize Al-Quds.

“The Zionist entity pays no attention to all international condemnations, it cares only about the US stance,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that throughout years, the US stance tactically prevented such Israeli rush to judaize Al-Quds.

However, he noted that this “US barrier” has gone now through Trump’s move to recognize Al-Quds as an Israeli capital.

“Trump told the Israelis: This Al-Quds is for you,” his eminence said, adding that the Zionist entity after Trump decision “got a green light to go ahead with its plot.”

Sayyed Nasrallah here elaborated on the dangers of the US move, wondering about the fate of Al-Quds residents and their lands.

“What will happen to their properties? Will they be demolished or seized?”

“The holy sites in Al-Quds are at real risk, especially Al-Aqsa Mosque which may be demolished at any time,” Sayyed Nasrallah warned.

“The fate of the Palestinian cause as whole is at stake. When Al-Quds is out of the equation, then what is left for the Palestinian cause?”

Significance

Turning to talk about significance of Trump’s decision, Sayyed Nasrallah said most of the countries across the world voiced opposition to the US move.

“Trump doesn’t listen to anyone. He doesn’t respect anyone, neither his allies, nor the international community.”

“Trump knows that his decision to give Al-Quds to an artificial state represents an insult to millions of Muslim and Christian people.”

Sayyed Nasrallah said that the US president has violated international resolutions and accords.

On the other hand,  the Lebanese resistance leader  wondered about the the value of the US-Arab alliance.

“Arab states have to know that they mean nothing to Trump and to the US,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

“We are before a blatant aggression that targets Al-Quds, its people, its holy sites and identity.”

Stances

On the other hand, Sayyed Nasrallah warned that the situation is critical and requires all sides in the Muslim and Arab Ummah (nation) to bear their responsibilities.

His eminence cited Israeli officials who expected that whatever Muslim and Arab reactions were they would be futile, especially that all Arab countries have been busy with their own internal problems.

In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah noted that the US stance took these givens into consideration and based on them Trump recognized Al-Quds as an Israeli capital.

“We don’t say (to Arab states) cut ties with the US… Trump said that what he did is for the sake of the so-called peace process. Then prove the opposite. The least reaction here is to expel Israeli ambassadors and to stop all aspects of normalization with the Zionist entity.”

“Of the normal and least reactions to Trump’s move also is an announcement by Palestinian factions that the peace process is dead now until the nullification of the decision to recognize Al-Quds as the Israeli capital.”

Meanwhile, Sayyed Nasrallah called on Arab leaders to hold an Arab summit and issue a resolution that binds all Arab League members to announce that Al-Quds is an everlasting capital of Palestine.

“The most important reaction also what Palestinian resistance movements have called for, which is a new Intifada.”

“I think that such measures will prompt Trump to mollify his decision or at least freeze the validity of his order.

Sayyed Nasrallah also called on Arab governments to halt wars and infightings and unite for Al-Quds.

His eminence meanwhile, hailed the Lebanese stance towards Al-Quds issue announced by President Michel Aoun, Premier Saad Hariri and Speaker Nabih Berri.

Talking more about Lebanon, Sayyed Nasrallah called for a mass rally next Monday in Dahiyeh in order to voice opposition to the US decision.

“I call on all Lebanese to take part in a mass rally to denounce the US aggression and to voice solidarity with the Palestinian people.”

“This is the least of what we have to do, and I salute the Palestinians who took to streets because they are our number one defensive line.”

Sayyed Nasrallah concluded his speech as saying: “All what our enemy has done were mere dump and would backfire against it. And we have the power to turn the threat into an opportunity.”

Source: Al-Manar

Related Articles

%d bloggers like this: