Independent

Robert Fisk suggests that ISIS violence is payback for “Palestine in 1948”


When we last visited the Independent’s ‘award-winning‘ Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk, he was warning about the (previously unknown) dangers posed to UK society by “radicalized” British Zionists, and his most recent Indy op-ed on the roots of ISIS jihad strives for similar heights of polemical fantasy. 

In a disjointed and tedious piece, Fisk cites several jihadist grievances which arguably have led to the Islamic State’s almost unparalleled barbarism. These include the West’s failure to stop the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Bosnia, the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and…yes, you guessed it.

All of which takes us back to that phrase “radicalisation” – replaced most recently, I notice, by “brainwashing”, presumably unearthed from the Korean War Communist psycho-war against US prisoners. I have said before that those foreign “Western” Muslims fighting for Isis must surely have been “radicalised” before they left their homes in Europe or America. We put this down to the internet, crazed preachers and a mumbo-jumbo version of religion. Sure. And let us not endow Isis with the right to resolve injustice. Not one word did it utter in sympathy for the 2,100 dead Palestinians in the last Gaza war. In his last weeks, even Osama bin Laden realised that Isis – and the Taliban – represented a sectarian clique rather than a jihad against Islam’s enemies.

But isn’t there also a legacy of history here? Did we think we’d get away with Palestine in 1948? Or Bosnia in 1992? Or Iraq in 2003? Doesn’t injustice get a look in any more?

His prose is quite confusing, but it seems clear – based on the context, as well as his history of animosity against the Jewish State – that he’s suggesting the violence committed by ISIS against innocent civilians, such as the executions of Steven Sotloff and James Foley, can rightfully be seen, at least in part, as payback for Western ‘collusion’ with Zionism in 1948. 

While we’re of course quite used to UK media analyses which (at least implicitly) blame Israel, or support for Israel by Western powers, for Islamist extremism, the mere ubiquity of such Judeocentric explanations for terrorism and its onslaughts doesn’t render it any less appalling.  

30 replies »

  1. Fisk is part of the left-wing narrative, the ‘racism of low expectations’. The West or Israel has to be responsible for everything because those olive-skinned folks can’t possibly be intelligent enough to be responsible for their own actions or to be held accountable to the same standards as whiter-skinned folks. It’s insidious and pathetic but Robert Fisk and his ilk are too keen to castigate the West to care or even notice.

    • Racism of Higher expectation, ethnically clean those who live in the house my grandfather use to live in 2000 years ago. Likely story –

      • The funny thing about the Zionist narrative is not just that it’s so much deeper than the brain dead dipshittery proposed by those whose reflexive reasoning is that the Jews control their pathetic, pointless lives, but that it can also be seen, quite literally, in the ground. As in, 2000+ years of proof through excavations, Champ. Kind of funny, huh? Both fairy tales and real life explain Israel’s existence.

        Who is the racist? Who is cleansing history? Come on, Joey, you tell me.

      • “..those who live in the house my grandfather use to live in 2000 years ago..”

        A different ‘moniker’ but the same illiterate, illogical, lying Bullshit.

    • This is not Left Wing narrative. This is blatant anti-Semitic bullshit.

      I have some news for the Right Wingers who blame everything on the Left: You behave just like the morons who blame everything on Israel.

  2. Fisk is so wrong. It isn’t payback for 1948 at all, it is payback for the First Crusade in 1096! In the same was the Scottish Referendum is payback for Bannockburn and so forth. Fisk seems able to take any two events and link them in some sort of contrived justification for the latter event. He is strong on finding obscure evidence of justification for any uncivilized actions he chooses to support. What he is pathetically weak on is understanding an alien ideology. He has become a man controlled by total belief in his own propaganda.

  3. Fisk forgot the rest: Israel is responsible for:
    Communism, capitalism, fascism, christianity, antisemitism in particular and any racism in general, globalization, nationalism, privatization and nationalization, religious beliefs and secularism, global warming and global cooling (take your pick), the growth and the fall of the interest rate, every tsunami and earthquake on Earth, the killing of Christ and his resurrection, the beating he suffered in Afghanistan, the failure of his local council to clean the streets and taking away the trash in time, the delay of the trains, the pollution of the environment, and the – please continue. (Not to forget about his fame as a pathological liar and his probably undersized whatever – everything due to his Jewish genes…)

    • You forgot the 865,000 Jews, who from 1941-67 did so many t roubling things that the countries from Morocco to Iran had to have pogroms, steal Jewish lands and assets and drive most of them to Israel so that Israel’s Jewish population was doubled with Arabic speaking Jews. Those Jews did it again!

      • Emanuel. I know you’re kidding, but there are nutcases out there (probably including Fisk) who say those pogroms were false flag operations organised by Zionists in order to persuade the local Jews to move to Israel, just as there are those who swear that the Zionists colluded with Hitler in the Holocaust (that, by the way, being the same Holocaust that the same nutcases insist never happened) to guilt-trip the World into “giving” us Israel.

    • Actually Israel is responsible for kiling 2000 men, women and children in Gaza over a period of two months on the pretext that they are all terrorists. Do not blame Israelis for things they are not responsible for. Peter, Are you trying to to divert attention from the Israeli administration that stands accused of crimes against humanity?

      • And who is responsible for starting the war against Israel that led to 2000 dead people over the course of a month? Might it be the same fanaticism that has led to the 200,000 dead in just over 3.5 years in Syria? Or even the 10,000 missiles launched at Israel since 2005?

        Tell me, Joey, when you shoot missiles at Israeli school children, is it somehow honorable because you claim it to be?

        • “And who is responsible for starting the war against Israel that led to 2000 dead people over the course of a month?”
          And are now saying that they are getting ready to do it again! We can see how much they care for their people – a ready supply of ‘martyrs’. They don’t care about individuals because they’ve got a big dream of the Hitler variety. This vile little reactionary movement needs to be seen for what it is – the anus of humanity – and then crushed.

      • Oh, is it 2000 now? When did it get changed again? And is it anything like the 1400 from Cast Lead? Who turned out to be (at least) 50% combatants?

        Israel stands accused simply of existing, let’s not pretend otherwise, eh. Oh, and while Israel might be accused of crimes against humanity, Hamas names streets after them and has an explicit desire to kill all the world’s Jews enshrined in its charter. But that’s probably ok, right?

      • Well, another complain about the death of hundreds of Islamist terrorists, of Hamas, Islamic Djihad and whatever other terror groups are creeping around, paid by Qatar and Iran. The law of war permits to attack terrorists hiding among civilian population. Armed resistance has to be identifiable, if not, it is terrorism and war crime against the own population.
        Accordingly you are supporting war criimes, at least a questionable position for a British citizen, but in no way a humanitarian position.

  4. Allegations of this kind are old news. The same reasoning was applied to al-Qaeda and 9/11, blaming Israel or West for supporting it.
    What I personally find most disturbing is what’s now widely accepted, in spite of being a distortion of reality, that the Arabs/Muslims were wronged in 1948. What really happened is that they got more than their share in Palestine, but tried get all and destroy the newly formed Israel with the stated goal of genocide. Considering that the Palestinians were led by a friend and fan of Hitler, a bastard who was particularly supportive of the Holocaust, the Jews had all reasons to take the threat very seriously.
    The idea that failing in destroying another nation and exterminating its people somehow justifies more savagery is so idiotic that I cannot imagine a serious response to it.

  5. Fisk’s piece in ‘The Indy’ today is, of course, blocked for readers’ comments, again.

    Fisk doesn’t seem to understand that the youthful jihadists heading for Paradise via a gap in the fence at the Turkish border are not old enough to remember Bosnia. So, the question, “Why are you crawling through the fence, Ahmed?” is unlikely to be met with the crisp reply, “Bosnia, mate, that’s why?”
    As usual, Fisk’s flawed logic neatly sidesteps the obvious with practiced dexterity.

    He shouldn’t be allowed near a keyboard!

  6. His prose is quite confusing, but it seems clear – based on the context, as well as his history of animosity against the Jewish State – that he’s suggesting the violence committed by ISIS against innocent civilians, such as the executions of Steven Sotloff and James Foley, can rightfully be seen, at least in part, as payback for Western ‘collusion’ with Zionism in 1948.

    While we’re of course quite used to UK media analyses which (at least implicitly) blame Israel, or support for Israel by Western powers, for Islamist extremism, the mere ubiquity of such Judeocentric explanations for terrorism and its onslaughts doesn’t render it any less appalling.

    It reminds of the antisemitic essay of the very influential historian and German nationalist Heinrich von Treitschle
    Die Juden sind unser Unglück
    which later on was adopted by Der Stürmer as label.
    Treitschke was a typical example of the drawing room (?) antisemitism (Salonantisemitismus) in Germany at that time, distancing himself from the so called “Radauantisemitismus” or crude antisemitism of Marr and others.
    This leads to nowadays drawing rooms (?), dinner or cocktail parties of the cultural left giving antizionism iis quite ‘natural’ environment, where the likes of Fisk and Milne are distancing themselves from ordinary antisemitism, but propagating hate against the Jewish state. by dirty, repulsive means like directly or indirectly comparing Israel to the NS regime, or demonise it as ven worse, and relativising the permanent terrorism and war crimes of Islamists and Palestinian terror organisations.
    Milne was even suspected of having taken part in training in terror camps due to his boasting at parties. The author was asked by The Guardian to run a correction of this article which was denied. Nothing followed.
    Fisk cynicylly incites antisemitism in the west by insinuating the Jewsih state is the root cause for Islamist terror against mainly Muslim populations, but against the west, too.

  7. There must be something in the water in Beirut. People writing from there like Fisk, Nir Rosen, Alastair Crook etc go off the rails. Then again, when you live in a country loyal to Teheran you must watch what you write. I understand.