Prominent Zionist gets caught out and fact-checked on Zionism by Muslim

To learn Muslim advocacy for Palestinian rights and the reputations against the arguments of the Zionist movement, I'll be teaching a 10 week course at the Quran Institute for online and on site students on Palestine advocacy. The 10 week course will consist of 30 hours of lesson time, and an almost equal amount of tutorial time that will go in depth into the history of Palestine, its peoples for our history, the Zionist movement events and justifications they use the plight of the Palestinians as a result of Zionism, both in history and today, and understanding the solutions for the occupation of Palestine. For those who want to seriously challenge what is going on in

Palestine, and make our campaign to bring international pressure to bear upon Israel as what happened to South Africa. We need to equip ourselves with powerful knowledge about the history of Palestine and know how to counter Zionist arguments indisputably. So join me on the 10 week course and raise the bar on Muslim advocacy for justice and the rights of our press brothers and sisters in Palestine register at the Quran, Institute for slash Palestine.

And Israel is just another case study in the crimes of nationalism, or the consequences of nationalism or crime is well, you could say in that it is a nation state exclusively for one racial group doesn't mean that it excludes other racial groups, but the nation state only represents one particular group, which is usually facilitated by a hopeful majority of that particular group. So it's not not to go back to the founders of Zionism, as you mentioned, them.

Vito hertzel, basically, didn't really give much regard to the natives of Palestine didn't give much regard to how they're going. What about their aspirations? What about their representation in government? What about government for them? So first, yes, he tried to ask the ultimate Khalif if he could, if he could sell it if they could sell the land to the Zionist and of course, he said no.

But nationalism doesn't just say well, okay, then fair Jews will accept that. Nazism says we need to try all the strategies because the ends justifies the means if it is necessary for the national interest if it is necessary for the national interest. And so they looked all avenues and Britain was a very willing Avenue, especially the money and the support and it also advantageous for Britain at the time. Balfour gave an introduction to a book on the history of Zionism. So he was certainly a solid supporter of Zionism. And his what fiddleheads describes what this new state would be.

He described it as not even just a nation state for Jews, but they can reside in peace and security. But also, as I'm going to quote in here, it would form a portion of a rampart of Europe, against Asia, an outpost of civilization, as opposed to barbarism.

We should be we should as a neutral state remaining content, all of Europe, which would have to guarantee our existence. So in a way, Farah hutsul is refuting you in many senses, because he's saying himself that in a way, Israel's existence will be supported and dependent upon guarantees by at that time Europe, he didn't envision America at the time that would step in to be the main guarantor of Israel's existence. And if your definition of sects of colonialism, but not settler colonialism, by the way, if your definition of colonialism is support by a Metropole of which is dependent upon, while the British very much did provide that, if you think that

that the colonies in South Africa or the colonies of the pilgrims of the Puritan pilgrims in Pennsylvania, were were colonialist were settler colonies. These were established mainly at the resources of private individuals, of course, with the permission of the various governments or the Dutch East, the Dutch East India Company, which would private corporations establishing these colonies, we have no problem calling them settler colonies. But suddenly we have a problem with calling the Zionist project which was established with international banking institutions or organizations that were called collars and colonisation organizations with no regard to the natives.

Why should that be different? And I'm going to quote you something and then I'll let you kind of come back very briefly. So he said, the idea of colonization of Palestine is Moreover, connected with the remarkable colonizing impetus, which is taking hold of the entire modern world. And judged by outward characteristics are the European migrations to foreign lands, their colonization and development. So very different. So very different from the this feature of Jewish aspiration. So is is very different from the the feature of Jewish aspirations. He's saying as a question about their exuberant energy finds no appropriate outlet in Europe, and so siki far away where it may be

usefully in

For the furthering of civilization in the midst of backward countries and nations, fruitful Jewish energy, which is being kept under in the diaspora will be gathered and transplanted to Palestine that can be proved true to itself and to the whole of civilization.

So, they describe themselves as settler colonists, they use the the terminology, and they even compared their aspirations to the European colonization project. So are we so different to them as a positive thing? Because because everyone was doing at the time, they said, Why don't we get a piece of the action? Why can't we do exactly the same thing? So that would be my main rebuttal to it. And as I said, written by an academic on settler colonialism, which I only summarized it for you, but people can, can please refer to it called a settler colonialism a theoretical overview, he talks about settler colonialism being where a group of people who they carry their sovereignty with them,

and they basically take over the sovereignty of a land which might have other people which can involve and most like usually does involve the transplantation or the exiting of those people and kind of finish up I also mentioned Theodore hertz wrote in his diary on top of June 1895, he said, regarding land, so when we occupy the land in Palestine, we shall bring forth immediate benefits to the state that that receives us. We must expropriate gently the private property on the state's assigned to us, we shall try to spirit the penance population across the border by procuring employment for it in transit countries while denying it any employment in our country. Okay, so he

basically said that even though we didn't talk about forced expulsion, but he talked about a type of expropriation of the property in the lands of the people within the land which are appropriate which are given to them by whichever Power Of course, and the spiriting away. So putting the penance population which already existed, finding ways to get them to other places, move them other places, which he hoped by the carrot, not by the stick, but by the carrot, which is to get employment for them in other countries. And this was also replicated by this the sentiment was also mentioned by many of the earliest the latest line is founders who talked about finding employment for landless

Arabs, which were being created to design science colonization and the nine employment back in Palestine. So they couldn't, they couldn't find employment back in Palestine. And only available in point would be outside of Palestine and then they can leave Palestine. So that will be that point. So basically, it set the current current ism, transfer the population or died at the beginning was only envisioned by the carrot not by the stick, basically compare themselves to other colonial projects, many settler colonial projects, which we will always call we would have no problem calling settler colonialism, like the Puritans in Pennsylvania saying that they colony on the British

charter charter didn't use any soldiers from the crown to do so. The Dutch East India Company in South Africa, they didn't use state soldiers to do so takeover communism land was a private venture by themselves, they had permission from the government. How is Zionism who use permission from whichever government controls the land or has the land believes it is has so much of the land to, you know, to take that land, from its inhabitants, ie from by creating a sovereignty, which is not the sovereignty of its inhabitants, but the sovereignty of those who are coming into it? How is that different to settler colonialism? If it looks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, and the duck

says it's a duck? Well, then it's a duck. Now, you then went on to hertl. To begin with the quotes that you brought up, though, we're actually talking about Argentina. And he actually if you read his diaries, when he talks about the promised land, he says the promised land is within us. It's the ability for us to create a state to state to escape mitzrayim, the ninth of June 19 1885. This is what he says in this day. We again, the data that you've read in Palestine disfavor, it is it's in Palestine disfavor is its proximity to Russia and Europe, its lack of room for expansion, as well as its climate, which we are no longer accustomed to. Because, obviously speaking as a European Jew,

a pretty cold climate, in its favor is the mighty legend. Obviously, for him, he's not a religious person, and he says the connection of the Jews the land is so mighty legend.

Obviously, we have archaeology in the day, when most people wouldn't describe it as a mighty legend. But yeah, what is effectively saying is our our strong connection to this place. And so

what we see from here is when hurtles writing to himself, and this is why he favors Argentina, which is Argentina, which is going to lead into the next point. But when he's writing to himself, he's honest, and he said he doesn't he

concern with Palestine is it's close to the Europeans and the Russians, he doesn't want to be in that mix. He doesn't want to be in the mix of the Ottomans. Right. That's crazy for him. He wants to be in the new world where he's safe, where the Jews won't have to worry about the superpowers that will oppress them like they have done since the Jews were exiled 2000 years ago.

And so his own thoughts to himself are much more telling than he is buttering up of Nobles around the world. He tells powerful people what powerful people want to hear. So then you mentioned a very famous quote. And what again, you failed to mention was he's not talking about Palestine, he's talking about Argentina, and it was the penniless quote. And so let me let me read the entire passage and then explain what it says. So when we occupied this, again, is a 12th of June 1885. When we occupied the land, we shall bring a meet and he's talking about Argentina here. We shall bring immediate benefits to the state that receipt state that receives us, we must expropriate gently the

private property on the estates assigned to us. So he's already saying this is land that has been assigned to us not coming in by force, we shall trade the spirit the penniless population across the border. So this was written 10 years before. He goes on to say about the penniless population in Egypt and in Jerusalem, that

this is 10 years before that, where he clearly does not want to do that he clearly talks about helping the impoverished and what you would what they describe as natives in that day. But the Arabs are living on land, we shall try to spirit away in fragment penulis population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries. So nothing about exposition is like we're going to help the by giving them work in other countries, which will be better for them. This is hurtful speaking not me. Oh, it is a sentiment of hurt so while denying it any employment in our own country because they wants to build a Jewish state where Jews have autonomy, which we don't have in

Europe, and the property owners will come over to our side, both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly. So then he goes on to say, it goes without saying that we shall respectfully tolerate persons of other faiths and protect their property, their honor and their freedom with the harshest means of coercion. So here we saying if there are landowners if there are not the not the penniless beggars, but the people who actually own the land, they will be completely protected in this state. And those penniless beggars that don't want to go they'll still be protected in hurtle state that is never realized because it hurts so

sadly died long before this vision. The Jewish sovereignty came to fruition that I know that the first Incidentally, people with avoiders were a bad odor. By the time the reshaping of world opinion in our favor has been completed, we shall be firmly established in our country, no longer fearing the influx of foreigners and receiving our visitors with aristocratic benevolence and proud and ability. Should there be any such immovable owners in individual areas who would not sell their property to us, we shall simply leave them there and develop our commerce in the direction of other areas which belong to us. If we move in, and it goes on and on and on, but effectively, he's not

talking about Palestine. He's talking about Argentina, he's talking about people who don't own the land. He's talking about people who live on the land, who are penniless and he's saying we can help them get employment elsewhere. let's let's let's go back to what you said about field a headstone. So fiddleheads was diary, quote, was written in the summer of 1895. At that point, he actually hadn't decided whether it was going to be Palestine or Argentina. So he didn't reference any particular countries when you said that he was referring to Argentina. That's, that's not exactly true. Right. And, you know, he didn't actually mention any particular he was he was he decided at

that point where it was going to be Argentina or Palestine. But you missed the point of the entire quote, which is he might have, even if I was to concede it was Argentina, even if I was to give you that. He's still outlining what he intends to do to any place. He wants to clarify somewhere. All right. The question is where where's the target? And Zionism wouldn't be any less settler colonialist. Just because it targets Argentina.

Okay, so it's a moot point. So you're, you're basically arguing that, well, you know, yeah, he was going to sit in a cocoon or someplace, but he hadn't decided it was person at that point, like, Well, alright, but that still doesn't change the point, that Zionism is settler colonialism. So that needs to be really addressed them.

If you

Enjoy the arguments presented in the debate and want to know more and learn how to debate discuss and advocate for Palestine yourself. Register now for the Palestine advocacy course and raise the bar in Muslim argument and activism. Please follow this link. The link is also available in the description