From the River to the Sea

Antisemitic?

A concerted effort is under way to brand the “From the River to the Sea” motto as antisemitic. This claim is baseless and should be rejected.

The full expression is, of course

FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA
PALESTINE WILL BE FREE

The implication of the motto is that Palestinians and the descendants of Palestinians who were expelled from their homes and land in the 1948 takeover of Palestine should have equal rights under the law and some form of a “right of return.” This motto implies or envisions a future state where all citizens of Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank have equal rights under the law. Sounds just awful, doesn’t it. In other words, democracy. Liberty, equality, and fraternity. The direct cause of the disaster unfolding in Gaza and greater Palestine is the absence of these.

Advocates of banning this motto claim that people who use it have the avowed purpose to exterminate the Jews. This is false. The great majority of Palestinians have no dreams of extermination on their minds. They simply want a decent, hopeful life for themselves and their families. There are indeed others, however, who also use this motto with a declared enmity and murderous intention towards the Israeli and in some cases all Jews. The question then is whether the use of the motto by those in general enmity with Jews should result in its prohibition or proscription to Palestinians and others who have no such goal in mind. The answer ought to come immediately to mind: “Hell no. Why are we even having this discussion?”

The “no” should be obvious. For example, ought we to ban the use of the word “liberty” because a few homicidal jackasses use it? Should we ban the motto “America First” because it was the motto of Nazis and Nazi-friendly Americans in the 1930s? Nope. Similarly “cancel” the free Palestine motto? It isn’t going to happen and it shouldn’t happen. In the past, one had to hate Jews in order to be considered antisemitic; now all you have to do is criticize any action of the state of Israel. The tactic is clear and intentional: harness the accusation of antisemitism to silence critics of Israeli conduct.

Zionists argue that in a democratic state, Palestinians will outnumber them and reverse their power and standing, changing the character of Israel from a “Jewish state” to a secular democracy. Seriously? Because just look at how well the “Jewish state” idea is working out. The idea of planting a Jewish state in the navel of the Middle East could not be and never has been achieved democratically. From the 1940s onwards Israel was taken by force and by what we call terrorism today. if you doubt that claim, look up the King David Hotel Bombing [1946] and assassination of Folke Bernadotte, the United Nations Security Council mediator in the Arab–Israeli conflict [1947–1948]. Fast forward to today: we still see a violent and erratic government, armed with an enormous nuclear arsenal, dependent on hundreds of billions of dollars in US foreign aid, operating the world’s largest outdoor concentration camp, and illegally seizing more and more land on the West Bank in violation of international law. Here is that law.

https://press.un.org/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm

Characterizing “From the River to the Sea” as antisemitic is unacceptable and efforts to do so should be repudiated and rejected emphatically. Peace in the “Holy Land” requires freedom from the Jordan to the sea and failure to achieve that vision could well lead to the death of Israel and a good part of the Middle East [see, the Sampson Option]. But that’s a story for another day and another blog entry.