De Israëlische VN ambassadeur: de weg naar vrede is overgave van de Palestijnen, waarbij ze nationalistisch suïcide moeten plegen….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Het is
Danny Danon, de Israëlische ambassadeur voor de VN, nu echt geheel in de psychopathische bol geslagen, volgens
hem moeten de Palestijnen zich overgeven zoals Egypte dat eerder
heeft gedaan, dit heeft dat land geen windeieren opgeleverd, aldus de ploert, waar hij overigens loog dat Egypte zich overgaf (voor details lees het hieronder opgenomen artikel)……..

Danon wijst er voorts op dat de Duitsers en Japan zich ook hebben overgegeven aan het
eind van WOII en ook voor hen betekende dit economische
vooruitgang, even vergetend dat Palestina geen soevereine staat is met een leger zoals Duitsland en Japan dat wel waren, kortom een vergelijking die als een tang op een varken slaat……

Uiteraard
moeten de Palestijnen verder afzien van een eigen staat, ofwel de
Palestijnen moeten nationalistische suïcide plegen. Alleen deze zaken
kunnen volgens Danon leiden tot duurzame vrede…… Danon vergeet
even dat Israël ook tegen de Palestijnen (die in ander ‘Israëlische gebied’
leven dan de West Bank of de Gazastrook) wetten heeft aangenomen
waarbij deze Palestijnen, door Israël aangeduid als arabieren,
werden teruggezet van klasse 2 burgers naar klasse 3 burgers…..

Danon
plaatste e.e.a. in de New York Times, dit tijdens overleg in Bahrein
over de toekomst van de Palestijnen, waar de Palestijnen niet aan
willen deelnemen, daar de voorwaarden voor deelname een overgave aan Israël zou
betekenen…….

Vergeet
niet dat de stichting van de staat Israël illegaal was en nog steeds
is, het grondgebied dat zionisten met geweld van de Palestijnen
afnamen, behoort nog steeds aan de vorige eigenaren, ofwel de
Palestijnen, die i.t.t. wat Israël zegt, wel degelijk rechten kunnen
doen gelden op de eigendommen die ze eeuwen in bezit hebben
gehad….. Niet de Palestijnen waren verantwoordelijk voor het
afvoeren van Joden naar de dodenkampen, maar nazi-Duitsland met
behulp van politie en andere autoriteiten van de bezette gebieden
(zoals die van Nederland), waaruit Joden werden afgevoerd……. Uit
schaamte ziet men in het westen alles door de vingers wat Israël flikt, terwijl dit land NB veel zaken heeft overgenomen die door de
nazi’s werden geïntroduceerd en nu worden gebruikt tegen het vervolgde Palestijnen
volk……

Lees het
volgende artikel van Jonathan Ofir, eerder geplaatst op
Mondoweiss en geeft het door mensen! Het Palestijnse volk heeft
alle recht op een normaal leven in een soevereine Palestijnse staat,
die niet wordt gegijzeld door het uiterst agressieve en inhumane
beleid van de gestolen staat Israël. De Israëlische terreur tegen het
verdrukte Palestijnse volk moet eindelijk stoppen!!

Writing
in the New York Times, Israeli UN Ambassador says Palestinian
surrender and ‘national suicide’ is needed for peace

Jonathan
Ofir on June
25, 2019

Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon addresses the U.N. Security Council. (Photo: U.N. Photo/Loey Felipe)

This
came out yesterday in the pages of the New
York Times:

The
“economic workshop” in Bahrain this week, a summit of business
leaders and political figures, is the first step in the rollout of
the Trump administration’s long-awaited Israeli-Palestinian peace
plan. However, because the plan offers a new approach, many on the
Palestinian side, including President Mahmoud Abbas and the chief
Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, say that the plan is dead on
arrival and that engaging with it is tantamount to a Palestinian
declaration of surrender. I ask: What’s wrong with Palestinian
surrender?

Israel’s
UN Ambassador Danny Danon’s opinion
piece,
titled “What’s Wrong With Palestinian Surrender?” posits
that the current Bahrain conference (today and tomorrow) is something
that Palestinians should have embraced, rather than rejected.

This
“economic workshop”, based upon the “deal of the century”
concept, is indeed proving to be dead on arrival. Arguably, this is
just the Emperor’s
New Clothes,
where the gown is called “New Palestine”, offering no political
substance, just a lot of money. Not only has the Palestinian
Authority boycotted it (and persuaded Palestinian businessmen not to
attend) – Israeli officials are reportedly not going to be there
either.

Danon
is simply chiding the Palestinians for yet again missing a wonderful
opportunity. Yet he is quite clear about what this opportunity means:
It’s an opportunity to surrender.

With
Danon, one is often instinctively caused to think “is he being
serious?” – but then you remember that this is the guy who waves
bibles at
the UN Security Council to claim ownership of all of historical
Palestine, and you get that yes, he’s being serious.

“Destroying
Israel”

Danon
writes that the problem with Palestinians is that their “national
identity” is about “destroying Israel”. Having chided the
Palestinians for their high unemployment rates despite foreign aid
(Danon does not mention that Israel plunders about
78% of that aid, though he does note over 50 percent unemployment in
Gaza), Danon then procedes to point out the supposed essential flaw
in the Palestinian national identity:

Yet
[Palestinian Chief Negotiator] Mr. Erekat and the Palestinian
leadership choose to stay the course and reject the term “surrender.”
In doing so, they expose the uncomfortable truth about the
Palestinian national identity: It is motivated not by building a
better life for its people but by destroying Israel.

To
bolster his point about this intrinsic flaw, Danon points out how
“Western national ethos” is liberal – and here he brings not
only the US “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” and the
French “Liberté, égalité, fraternité”, but also the Israeli
“natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate
in their own sovereign State”. This is deeply ironic. If Danon were
following the vein of the former two, he could have cited something
else from the Israeli Declaration of Independence, for example
“complete equality of social and political rights to all its
inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex”. For all the
discrepancy between what is written and reality, it would have at
least looked better.
But no, Danon chooses one of the most nationalist, exclusivist
clauses, containing the “master” language, which in the Israeli
reality has an all too cynical meaning. Danon reveals his
white-and-Jewish-supremacist bias, which he seems to think is
enlightened.

Danon
then compares this to the supposed Palestinian ethos, citing from the
1968 PLO charter:

In
contrast to these Western national ethoses, the charter of the
Palestine Liberation Organization, a precursor to the Palestinian
Authority, states its “mottos” as “national unity, national
mobilization, and liberation” and talks about the “basic conflict
that exists between the forces of Zionism and of imperialism on the
one hand, and the Palestinian Arab people on the other.”
Palestinian leaders have rejected multiple peace overtures, launched
intifadas and wars, and sponsored countless acts of terrorism in
adherence to this belief.

Putting
aside for the moment that the PLO has moved to recognize Israel in
treaty, in the 1993 Oslo Accords (while Israel has never recognized
Palestine and Danon’s Likud “flatly rejects the establishment of
a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river”), Danon’s
former comparison of the “Western ethos” as opposed to these
supposedly backwards Palestinian “mottos”, precisely betrays the
colonialist nature of his Zionist venture. The Palestinians are not
allowed to “liberate” themselves from enlightened colonialist
rule – the best they can do is “surrender”, for their own good,
of course.

Palestinians
need to commit “national suicide”

Danon
falsely suggests that the Palestinian aim for statehood is anathema
to recognizing Israel and what he calls “the Jewish people”. The
fact that Israel is recognized in the Oslo Accords proves this is an
invalid point. The two-state solution was precisely seen, at least
from the Palestinian standpoint, as a means of recognition of both
Israel and Palestine, where the PLO had already made concessions to
suffice with a mere 22% of historical Palestine (this ideological
concession was already being made around the
early 1980’s).
But Danon now says that Palestinians should be willing to
negotiate even
without any prospect of a state,
to give up that ambition totally:

With
this national ethos, negotiating without the explicit endorsement of
a Palestinian state is seen as a rejection of the Palestinian
national identity, and an acknowledgment that Israel and the Jewish
people are here to stay. In short, for Mr. Abbas and Mr. Erekat, this
approach is akin to national suicide. Yet a national suicide of the
Palestinians’ current political and cultural ethos is precisely
what is needed for peace. The belief that the Jews have no right to
the land and Israel is to be destroyed, which engenders a culture of
hate and incitement, needs to end.

In
other words, Danon is saying to Palestinians “drop dead.” Danon
is thus suggesting that Palestinians should resort to hopes of a
better afterlife, following their suicide. At least there’s
something to look forward to.

Surrender,
like Egypt

Danon
makes the invalid comparison of Palestine to other sovereign
countries, some of which had surrendered in the past yet experienced
a prosperous (economic) future later. He thus brings examples from
World War Two:

The
United States did not eradicate the German and Japanese people after
their surrender in World War II, but instead helped transform them
from imperial military powers to what are today among the world’s
leading economic powerhouses.

To
bring the comparison closer to our times and to the region, Danon
compares Palestine to Egypt:

In
the Middle East, following defeat in four conventional wars between
1948 and 1973, Egypt surrendered the idea that it could wipe Israel
from the region, and President Anwar Sadat chose peace, which Israel
was ready to accept. After the 1979 peace agreement, Egypt became a
favored recipient of American foreign and military aid, and the
beneficiary of an influx of Western investment. There is no reason to
believe a Palestinian declaration of surrender could not lead to a
similar transformation.

These
comparisons are deeply problematic, for several reasons. First,
Palestine is not a state like Egypt, or Japan, or Germany, with a
military, with their own sovereign territory etc. Palestine is
essentially a fully occupied set of Bantustans which are at the mercy
of Israel’s whims, from checkpoints in the West Bank to seasonal
massacres in Gaza.

Second,
Egypt did not “surrender” – in fact, it surprised Israel in a
devastating joint attack with Syria in 1973, which Egypt fought on
its own occupied Sinai peninsula – not even Israeli territory. That
attack was the language of force, which Israelis regularly chide the
“Arabs” for being the only thing they understand. When Sadat
offered peace overtures to Golda Meir in 1970, he was ignored;
Defense Minister Moshe Dayan said “Better Sharm el-Sheikh without
peace than peace without Sharm el-Sheikh”, referring to the Sinai
coastal town. So, in 1973 Israel got force, a language it
understood, and that led to the peace treaty signed in 1979, where
Israel agreed to withdraw from the Egyptian Sinai. If one wants to
use the word “surrender”, it could be argued that Israel
“surrendered” its wishes to control the Sinai.

“The
Palestinians have little to lose”

Finally,
Danon ends his torturous article with the paragraph:

The
Palestinians have little to lose and everything to gain by putting
down the sword and accepting the olive branch. Israel awaits the
emergence of a Palestinian Anwar Sadat, a leader who is willing to do
what is best for his people — a leader who recognizes that building
a bright future requires surrendering a dark past.

It
may be a Freudian slip, when Danon says “the Palestinians have
little to lose”. US moves to defund various forms of aid to
Palestinians, to “remove from the table” the critical issue of
Jerusalem by moving its embassy, and Israeli blackmailing in the form
of withholding tax revenues, amongst a plethora of other coercive
measures, appear to be aimed at forcing the Palestinians into ever
more dire economic straits, from which they would be prone to
extricate themselves by acceding to the “economic peace” plans
which involve their “national suicide”. But colonialists often
make this error in judgement. They assume, that the only thing their
inferior subjects want is to exist, and make money. Like Jared
Kushner said it recently, when he suggested that
Palestinians were not ready to govern themselves:

What
[the Palestinian people] want is they want the opportunity to live a
better life. They want the opportunity to pay their mortgage.

The
idea that these people might want, or need, freedom from the yoke of
oppression, is apparently beyond the scope of the colonialist mind.
As Danon says, they need to surrender. And this is not in order to be
“masters of their own fate”. Oh, no, Danon makes clear that
mastership is reserved solely for Jews in Israel and Palestine.
Palestinians need to know their place in this hierarchy. In this
hierarchy, Danon, the bible-waving Jew, is at the top, and
Palestinians are at the bottom.

===========================

Zie ook:

‘Israëlische ‘Friends Tweet’ komt als een boemerang terug met de gruwelen die Israël begaat tegen het verdrukte Palestijnse volk‘

‘Palestijnse kinderen hebben recht op leven, vrij van onrecht en onderdrukking‘

‘Israël houdt 24 uur per dag Palestijnen in de gaten met gezichtsherkenningsapparatuur en hulp Microsoft‘

‘Israël valt doelen aan in Libanon, Syrië en Irak >> oorlogsmisdaden, zonder één woord van kritiek uit het westen‘

‘Israël gebruikt sadistisch geweld bij vernietigen Palestijnse huizen in Oost-Jeruzalem‘

‘Zomaar een paar dagen uit ‘het leven’ van Palestijnen: vernederingen, beledigingen, vernietiging en moord door Israël‘

‘Huis van Afgevaardigden VS stemt massaal voor beperking vrijheid van meningsuiting: BDS in de ban en vrijbaan voor Israëls gewelddadig beleid tegen Palestijnen‘

‘Israël steelt 141 miljoen dollar aan belastinggeld van de Palestijnse Autoriteit‘

‘Israël gaat alweer haar boekje ver te buiten in Oost-Jeruzalem‘

‘Israël maakte het onmogelijk voor arabieren terug te keren naar hun huizen‘