Herzl in 1895: “We must expropriate gently the private property on the state assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country.” 2/10
David Ben-Gurion in 1915, NYC, compared the colonising activity of the Zionists to the white settlers in North America and South Africa 3/10 benyehuda.org/read/6104
In 1947, Chaim Weizmann appeared before the UN partition committee and compared the the Jewish Agency's activity to the East India Company, the instrument of British Imperialism 4/10
Weizmann also told UNSCOP that compared to other colonial projects the Zionist is the best in business 5/10
Similarly, the Zionist Herbert Morrison, MP for South Hackney, told the House of Commons on 24 Nov 1938 that the Zionists are first-class colonisers. 6/10
Similarly, the Anglo-American Commission in 1946 acknowledged the colonial character of the Jewish Agency declaring it is the most successful "colonial" project in history 7/10
The injustice of the Zionist programme was recognised at the early stages by external observes such as the American King-Crane Commission in 1919 which highlighted the denial of self-determination of the native population 8/10
Likewise, Foreign Minister Balfour, in a letter to the Prime Minister on 19 February 1919, acknowledged: “The weak point of our position of course is that in the case of Palestine we deliberately and rightly decline to accept the principle of self-determination." 9/10
King-Crane Commission also highlighted that such a colonial project can only achieved by coercion, subjugation, and violence against the natives.
Do not let them rewrite history. 10/10
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Are we supposed to ignore 6 books (2 volumes) of Herzl diaries, his pamphlet (1896), his novel (1902), that display colonial & orientalist worldview, and believe that in the last 2 years of his life he became egalitarian? 1/6
The Jewish State (1896): “We should there [Palestine] form a portion of a rampart Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism”. 2/6
Herzl (v. I 1896): “If it is God’s will that we return to our historic fatherland, we should like to do so as representatives of Western civilization & bring cleanliness, order & the well-distilled customs of the Occident to this plague-ridden, blighted corner of the Orient" 3/6
The legal case before the ICJ is turning into an epic legal battle of Global South vs. Global North, as evident from German and Canadian interventions, and previous US statements, during the 2nd day of the ICJ hearing: 1/17
This is a case brought by a former colonised nation that was subjected to apartheid against a current settler colonial state that imposes an apartheid and is fully backed by the western governments and media that deny the fact of Isr apartheid. 2/17 amnesty.org/en/latest/news…
European & North American countries are on trial because they are complicit in the genocide; they have an interest in denying this a genocide. Germany's, Canada's statements are attempts to pressure the court before it issues provisional measures. 3/17 timesofisrael.com/germany-says-w…
One the bizarre arguments I heard against South Africa, in the past week, is that it should not "involve itself in international affairs" and focus on its internal affairs; that the case is a "media stunt". Few remarks: 1/5
First, those supporting the war like the US and EU are "involving themselves in international affairs" by supporting the genocide. Their complicity is a violation of the convention. S.A. is allowed to involve itself in trying to prevent a genocide. 2/5
Second, No respected commentator said this when the Gambia brought its case against Myanmar and involved itself in international affairs. In fact, many western countries joined the Gambia or supported its application. This shows the double standards. 3/5
Initial thoughts on South Africa's brilliant presentation of its case for provisional measures in the Genocide case at the ICJ:
A thread
South Africa a tightly argued, comprehensive, and compelling application. It has now supplemented that by a compellingly argued and powerfully presented oral presentation.
Like in its submission, S.A. started by insisting on context: Nakba since 1948; ongoing denial of self-determination and right to return. 75-year apartheid, 56-year occupation, 16 year siege. It stated that decades of impunity have emboldened Israel to intensify its crimes
The question is what does Barak's record show: 1. Here is Jimmy Carter (2006 book) telling Barak he should know more about the Palestinians' conditions before ruling on them, and Barak justifying his wilful blindness 1/6
Here is my comment on this Carter-Barak conversation (in 2007 article) emphasising the otherness of the Palestinians in Israeli jurisprudence of occupation 2/6
Here are instances in which Barak understood his rule as defending Israel abroad (from my article in 2014). 3/6
I argued that Barak served as a "diplomat judge", Israel's main defender abroad. 2/5
As a diplomat judge he legitimated Israel's system of oppression over the Palestinians in the occupied territories. Like Sharon before him (during ICJ Wall case), Netanyahu is playing the Barak card. 3/5