From One Zionist to Other Zionists

Welcome Lower Merion residents!

We're glad you stopped by. Go ahead and register for a free account to get the benefits of being a member, including:
  • Access to all of our posts and comments
  • Your own profile including an avatar, buddy lists, and other social networking features
  • The ability to send private messages to other users on this site
  • The ability to chat and interact with other citizens and voters in and around Lower Merion.
Creating an account is easy. Register now!

(Don't live in Lower Merion? That's okay. We won't hold it aginst you.)
politeia's picture
Last seen: 3 years 9 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-07-30 :00

I Posted This the other day on my Ron Paul thread.

Rafi Farber is a Zionist Jew who lives on the West Bank of Israel.

Not being Jewish, I have not felt too comfortable discussing my views on Israel for fear of being labeled an anti-Semite. This is not normal for me. Usually I could care less what others think or say about my views because I am entitled to them as a free person in a free society. I took a beating in the form of vicious, endless and mindless personal attacks where the those making the attacks (including one poster here on SAC) refused to discuss the substantive issues over on MLMN on a local issue last week and I continued to stand up for myself and my views on an issue of public concern.

Perhaps speaking about Israel is too close to home given friendships I have. Lower Merion has a large Jewish community and I have a lot of Jewish friends where I could be told I could not possibly understand the issues in Israel because I am a Gentile (even though I know my Jewish friends would never label me an anti-Semite).

So, from This Post on Rafi’s website Settlers of Samaria, I give you the views I support of this Zionist Jew who lives on the West Bank of Israel.

I love Israel. I love my country, and the land that God gave my family. I would fight and die for this place. I live here. I am not a peace activist. Nor am I a warmonger. I don’t believe in peace treaties with anyone whatsoever, nor do I believe in going to war under shaky pretenses.

I’m 28. Much of my high school and college career occurred during the end of Oslo and Arafat and Barak’s meeting at Camp David, and the subsequent outbreak of the brutal and bloody 2nd Intifadah murder spree. Watching every single suicide bomb on the news right after it happened, as a high school kid, drove me mad with rage against Islam and “terrorists” and Arabs. I hated them for their method of murder and killing my Jewish family. It is hard for me to describe the dehumanizing emotions I had.

The emotions were so strong that any attempt to attach “motives” to “terrorist” actions made me react impulsively and with disgust at whoever suggested that terrorists even had “motives”. I just wanted them dead and out of my country. These are classic “neocon” feelings. We’re good, they’re evil, that’s it, end of story, if you even try to explain anything you’re getting us all killed.

Now, if you identify with these feelings, let me ask you a few questions. Try to clear your head and see things from above for a second.

Were any of America’s wars since World War II necessary? What did any of them accomplish? How many people did they kill? Did America have to go into Vietnam? Why? Did they have to go into Korea? Why? Did they have to go into Iraq? Why? Did they have to prop up the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia? What about Egypt? Was involvement there necessary? Did we really have to overthrow the Iranian government in 1953 in order to install the Shah?

WHY? Why did America have to do that?

What is the point of all of this? What has it accomplished? What would the world look like today if none of this ever happened? Would September 11th have happened? Would there be a “War on Terror?”

What the hell IS the “War on Terror”? Who is “Terror”? How does the war end?

The answer to this is actually pretty simple. The standard reaction is “America did all this for her security.”

I used to believe that. But I no longer do. America is not secure. She is a nation teetering on the biggest bankruptcy in world history, and running on the fumes of borrowed Chinese money. Her citizens are poorer and more dependent on handouts that they get from a government running on borrowed Chinese money.

In the last debate on December 15, every Republican presidential candidate talked about how they were going to A) Cut the budget and B) Massively expand the military. None of them realized the apparent contradiction here. Why? Because there is no substance to any of these war hungry power driven men with no souls. They fight not because they believe in something. They fight because it gives them power. Saying they’ll cut the budget will give them power. Saying they’ll massively expand the air force and the “modernize” the navy while at the same time dealing with a $15 trillion debt, this is just mad. It’s simply mad.

I wonder now if any of them are even conscious of the words that are coming out of their pandering mouths. These smiling, grinning, nonsensical people convinced that America has to put a no fly zone over Syria now and other such EXPENSIVE nonsense that CHINA is running out of money to FUND.

Ron Paul’s strongest point in the debate was when he asked Mitt Romney, the guy talking about cutting the budget while massively expanding the air force, the following question:

“How are we going to do that? We don’t have any MONEY!”

For those who can see the humanity in Ron Paul, who aren’t brainwashed by fearmongerers like Bachmann who says that if she becomes president Iran will nuke the US, you could read the horror in Paul’s face. “How am I on the stage with such…people? Is there anyone behind any of these shiny veneers? Do they even realize they are not making ANY SENSE?”

Every candidate, including Obama, is drunk on power. They go to war not for security, but because, as president of the most powerful country in the world, they can’t resist playing with their toy armed forces. And they CAN’T RESIST coming over here, to Israel, and telling us exactly how to make peace with our neighbors.

What if Ron Paul is right? What if September 11 really did happen because America simply can’t mind her own business? What if none of these undeclared wars ever had to happen, and 2 million vietnamese and Iraqis were still alive today?

If you ponder that question seriously, and it flicks a light on in your head and you recognize the possibility of it for even a fraction of a second, you can do one of two things:

1) Shut that recognition down immediately and go back to thinking America has no blame in any of this.

2) Allow yourself to ponder further, ultimately culminating in a sudden rush of remorse that millions had to die for this pointless nonsense and you just didn’t realize it.

Whether it’s War Making or Peace Making, America feels they have to be in it all. What if Ron Paul is right? Imagine if he were president. Would he have forced Arafat and Barak to sit down and pretend to be friends at a meeting that was destined to explode in a murderous intifadah? Would he, like Clinton, pressure Israel to invite Arafat back into Israel to “make peace” with him? Would the second Intifadah have ever broken out? Would the first one? What if America simply left us alone to handle our own issues? Would any of the death and murder that drove me into a rage in high school ever have happened?

I remember when Obama ran and said something about talking to Iran. I thought it was a really really bad idea because I was a neocon back then. But I also never trusted Obama for a second and knew he was just saying this to get power. I knew he was just as fake as the rest of them and I didn’t believe in his “change” nonsense. I saw right through it. There was no human being there. Just a political veneer.

But Ron Paul is a real person. When he speaks to you at a debate, it’s a bona fide human being talking there. Imagine if we had one of those in the White House. Do you think the Ayatollah would chill out just a bit? We could back off each other, get some perspective? The White House could back the heck off of me in Israel and leave me alone? And if we feel like Iran is a threat over here, to let us deal with it how we want to deal with it without calling him up and asking permission like a lapdog?

What the heck does Iran have to do with America? Are they going to cross the Atlantic in the aircraft carrier that they don’t have and nuke Manhattan? Are they going to use their intercontinental ballistic missiles they don’t have and bomb Washington DC?

No. What America has to do with Iran is this: America thinks it runs the world. And there’s an annoying brat in Persia that America thinks has to be put in line. But it’s really none of America’s business. Leave Iran alone. All America is doing by threatening Iran is endangering me in Israel. Let us deal with it if we have to, but stay in your own hemisphere.

Don’t you think the world would be a much less scary place if there was a HUMAN BEING in the oval office?

What if Ron Paul is right?

What if?

Now, I understand there are different views on this issue.

My take on settlements in the West Bank and how Israel chooses to work with its neighbors is simple.

It’s the business of the sovereign nation of Israel and not the U.S.

The U.S. meddles too much in the business of other nations and it generally causes more harm than good (I can give endless examples in the Middle East/North Africa with Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, etc., etc).

It’s time for the U.S. to stop being the military policeman and regime changers of the world. For the most part, the internal affairs of other sovereign nations are none of our business, and not only can we not afford all this control via military power and force as the U.S is in a dire financial condition, but it causes far more harm than good in most instances where we meddle.

One side will always end up hating us, and then blowback in the form of terrorism by those we side against or those who are not favored by the U.S. instead side with China or Iran due to our meddling.

If we don't interfere and take sides, we don't have these problems. That's not to say we can't be diplomatic and make suggestions, but even forced peace accords by the U.S. like we do in Israel tend to cause blowback and more harm than good - and our attempts to broker peace with Israel and its neighbors only ends up getting a lot of people on both sides killed. Let them work it out. That way those negotiating will feel they worked things out without coercion from an outside country and peace will have a better chance.

China is far closer to having better access to resources in the Middle East and Africa as they work and trade with those nations as opposed to bombing them.

Imagine. Communist China is gaining a stronger status in the Middle East and Africa via peaceful means while the U.S. is losing friends due to our "do as I say, not as I do or we will bomb you" mentality.

Who would have thunk peace and trade would win out over belligerent force?

I think most sensible and thoughtful people think that, but obliviously not those power hunger politicians of both political parties in Washington, D.C.


Brotherhood of Thieves ~ As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence.

Average: 4.5 (4 votes)
Your rating: None

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LexoTime5's picture
Last seen: 4 years 11 weeks ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31

"West Bank of Israel" is not a term I've heard before, and doesn't make much geographic sense. What we've traditionally think of as the West Bank is the land to the west of the Jordan River. There is no land to the west of Israel.

That caveat aside, there's lots to think about in this, and I find a lot to agree with. Thanks for posting ( and thanks for being brave enough to open what more often than not is a can of worms.)

Average: 3 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
politeia's picture
Last seen: 3 years 9 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-07-30 :00

It's on the west bank of the River Jordan. The country of Jordan is on the east bank.

That’s how the West Bank got its name.

The dispute is who the West Bank “belongs” to.

In referencing the “West Bank of Israel” I am speaking of Rafi’s view that the West Bank is a biblical part of Israel. I was taking his perspective, which is that of many Jews in Israel.

The territory now known as the West Bank was a part of the British “Mandate of Palestine” that came about after World War I. The terms of the Mandate called for the creation in Palestine of a “Jewish national home” without prejudicing the civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish population of Palestine.

This would also go to the term “West Bank of Israel” from an historical perspective.

Today, the West Bank is considered by certain Arab factions as solely part of Palestine (which is a disputed term by many Zionists) and is being occupied by Israeli settlers through force.

This gets to the gist of my whole post.

These issues should be worked out by those in dispute in the area without U.S. interference as I believe it would then provide for a better long term solution and chance at peace than a brokered one by an outside power.

I would also hope I opened up this can of worms in a diplomatic manner, and it can be discussed in a reasonable manner if people choose to post on this emotional and political hot potato.

Everyone knows that I treat other bloggers respectfully unless forced into a corner by vicious personal attacks, which I always consider best to avoid.


Brotherhood of Thieves ~ As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence.

Average: 4.4 (5 votes)
Your rating: None



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.