Do you consider Israel a good country

[Craig234]

I don't think it's that simple. I think there are a lot of great things about Israel but that they have also succumbed to bigotry against Palestinians leading them to very bad things.

 

[eldorado99]

I consider it the other way around. They don't really do jack shit for the US, if they were a puppet they'd be more useful. But we spend an awful lot of money and energy keeping them safe, so it's fair to ask who is using who.

They do plenty for the US. They exist to allow the US to exert just enough control to destabilize the region to keep themselves secure. If you read about US "Grand Area Planning" that started at the end of WW2 all US foreign policy today makes perfect sense: http://zcomm.org/wp-content/uploads/zbooks/htdocs/chomsky/sam/sam-1-3.html

 

[norseamd]

They do plenty for the US. They exist to allow the US to exert just enough control to destabilize the region to keep themselves secure. If you read about US "Grand Area Planning" that started at the end of WW2 all US foreign policy today makes perfect sense: http://zcomm.org/wp-content/uploads/zbooks/htdocs/chomsky/sam/sam-1-3.html

Well fucking shit. I am wondering where this will lead. Although the Russians were not any more moral back then or even today. There is cause in preventing the Russians from world domination but we have to think about what other shit America does as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wise_Men_(book)

 

[eldorado99]

Well fucking shit. I am wondering where this will lead. Although the Russians were not any more moral back then or even today. There is cause in preventing the Russians from world domination but we have to think about what other shit America does as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wise_Men_%28book%29

An interesting point I have heard made: The US is conducting operations in the neighboring Eastern European countries to Russia(the US has also done so in Cuba for well over 50 years). What do you think would happen if Russia decided to conduct military operations in Canada or Mexico?

 

[norseamd]

http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58323

 

[norseamd]

An interesting point I have heard made: The US is conducting operations in the neighboring Eastern European countries to Russia(the US has also done so in Cuba for well over 50 years). What do you think would happen if Russia decided to conduct military operations in Canada or Mexico?

A good point but keep in mind the countries around the Muscovites have been bullied and oppressed for centuries. They are not fond of the Muscovites.

 

[eldorado99]

A good point but keep in mind the countries around the Muscovites have been bullied and oppressed for centuries. They are not fond of the Muscovites.

Yes, and that serves US interests just fine.

 

[norseamd]

Yes, and that serves US interests just fine.

Yep.

The problem for the 21st century is not insuring the continuation of dominance of America but preventing the Chinese from assuming the same role with the Russians tagging along as a batservent. One possible way to do this is increase the power of countries not subservient or friendly with the Chinese and Russians. Countries like this include India, Vietnam, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, South Korea, the Baltics, Finland and Scandinavia, Poland, Turkey, and the Philippines.

 

[Harabec]

The cold war era prompted the beginning of massive military aid that continues to this day.
That is direct US policy for the mid-east - not some evil Zionist conspiracy.

Other than that, I'll add (not directly to the OP's question since I can't answer it without bias) that no matter what happens, the memory of total war (by Arab states around us) always lingers in the back of our heads. Taking chances like we have our own continent while sending troops elsewhere is not a luxury we can afford and this often dictates some harsh moves.

Some of the things the country does are bad, some are good, some are the inevitable reality of war.

BTW, I don't get the numbers game. Would people be happy if we executed our own citizens to match casualties on the other side? Does preventing damage to your population count as a bad thing? I ask this as a general question, regardless of the current conflict.
Would you consider a lack of deaths on your side a loss, because war needs to be "fair" and symmetric?

 

[alzan]

Moral and just? Better than most but they have their extremists as well.

Loyal ally to the US? I think they would support the US within their defined limits but they are mostly only interested in themselves.

 

[Caravaggio]

BTW, I don't get the numbers game. Would people be happy if we executed our own citizens to match casualties on the other side? Does preventing damage to your population count as a bad thing? I ask this as a general question, regardless of the current conflict.
Would you consider a lack of deaths on your side a loss, because war needs to be "fair" and symmetric?

That is a fair point. It would be absurd to criticise Israel for not suffering enough, given Jewish history.

Yet there is great general discomfort in watching such asymmetric warfare. Mark Twain, once an advocate of US imperialism, radically changed his mind after learning of the action of US marines against poorly armed Moros in their Philippines mountain bastion back in 1906.

If Gaza had a navy and airforce equipped with the latest US kit, then we could talk of war. But in reality, Gaza is just an overcrowded slum, fed by UN. Aid, educated by UN funds and where the overwhelmed hospitals are funded by outside agencies.

It just looks so cruel and sadistic, especially when we see pictures of Zionist sightseers sitting on sofas and drinking beer, on the hilltops of Sderot, cheering and whooping while the bombs kill the brutalised civilians two miles away in Gaza.
For evidence and pictures of this go to:
http//www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/israelis-cheer-gaza-bombing.

 

[Harabec]

For evidence and pictures of this go to:
http//www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/israelis-cheer-gaza-bombing.

I know about that. Sderot has been on the receiving end of non-stop rocket and mortar attacks for the last 14 years.
For once they get to leave the shelters and watch the IDF do its thing.

As to the asymmetric warfare images - that is the nature of guerrilla warfare in urban settings. The US had no idea what that was like until it decided to stick around in Iraq - and you left that mess to implode on itself (now with 100% more ISIS).
War isn't clean, it isn't a game or a Michael Bay movie. It is where the worst things in life happen (ask your veterans) and we don't take it lightly.

 

[Caravaggio]

I know about that. Sderot has been on the receiving end of non-stop rocket and mortar attacks for the last 14 years.
For once they get to leave the shelters and watch the IDF do its thing.

Well, if that is the IDF 'thing', I think it stinks.

I have just watched a Palestinian aid worker in Gaza, he is a guy in a green t-shirt. He is on his back on the ground, shot in the hand by an HV IDF sniper round. He was unarmed and in great pain. A British Channel 4 press group caught up with him and as several people tried to pull him back clear of the line of fire, he was 'finished-off', on camera, by the same sniper. He was clearly unarmed. Through a sniper scope the IDF soldier who gently squeezed that trigger would have know that from 1000 metres away. I have been an army marksman.

You are winning your colonial racist war of ethnic cleansing on the ground, but losing it on the social media.
The guy in the jeans and green t-shirt will spoil your day, I promise. His image will be around the world tomorrow.

That is why 5,000 Maghrebi Jews have found it unsafe to live in France and they want to do 'Aaliyah' and go 'home' to Israel. But Israel is not their 'home' is it? It is a self-declared racist land, created by ethnic cleansing and terrorism and the people living in that part of Palestine now, actually have their roots thousands of miles away in Eastern Europe. Which explains why speaking Yiddish in Israel is rather frowned upon, as that old European tongue rather gives the game away, doesn't it?

Only a Zionist twit believes that myth-history of 'home is Jerusalem'.
Read Shlomo Sand 'the invention of the Jewish People' (2009)

And

Ilan Pappe, the 'Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine'.(2006)

Both authors are Jewish, by the way.

 

[Oyeve]

Israel just simply needs to go away.

 

[sandorski]

A real mixed bag. I think it is necessary that it exists, however, it needs to stop taking more land through nefarious means.

 

[Harabec]

I have just watched a Palestinian aid worker in Gaza, he is a guy in a green t-shirt. He is on his back on the ground, shot in the hand by an HV IDF sniper round. He was unarmed and in great pain. A British Channel 4 press group caught up with him and as several people tried to pull him back clear of the line of fire, he was 'finished-off', on camera, by the same sniper. He was clearly unarmed. Through a sniper scope the IDF soldier who gently squeezed that trigger would have know that from 1000 metres away. I have been an army marksman.

Got a link to that?

 

[norseamd]

Got a link to that?

https://www.google.com/search?q=pal...+worker+sniper&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

 

[norseamd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBakqLUBWP0

 

[norseamd]

The question is, how do you best solve that? I certainly don't accept the notion that the best solution is all options are on the table, which is the politest way of saying we're going to go to war if we don't solve the nuclear problem quickly. The fact of the matter is Israel has an effective nuclear monopoly in the region, and it will have that for a long time. And one thing that the Iranians are certain not to do is to undertake some suicidal mission the moment they have one bomb. So the notion that's been publicized in America that there could be a crazy Iranian rush to have the bomb in nine months is, to me, meaningless. What do you do with a single nuclear weapon that you have for the first time, that you haven't tested, that you haven't previously weaponized, that you cannot be sure that you can deliver effectively, and with which you cannot protect yourself from retaliation because you don't have any more? And the Israelis have a very strong military, and they have about, what -- estimates are 150 to 200 bombs. That's enough to kill every Iranian. So I think that issue is phony.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...ki+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

 

[shortylickens]

No.
They're desperate to survive and doing whatever it takes.
If that means schmoozing around the globe and getting allies, so be it.

Why do you think they declare all jews to be citizens of Israel? It aint out of the kindness of their freakin hearts!

 

[Whiskey16]

As in do you consider Israel an moral and just country...

On a fair balance -- most certainly not.

A country that continues high international crimes of aggression and ethnic based supremacist policies, then no, it most certainly cannot be perceived to be just nor moral.

Via my misplaced presentation in the bad place, here is quick thesis to support that position:

Rather than any plausible settlement with its occupied native populations, the state of Israel has a strategic desire to maintain the status quo with a divided and weakened Palestinian presence all to acquiesce its continued criminal expansion and ethnic cleansing.

Currently, under occupation, Palestinians face extreme economically competitive disadvantages. It is intentionally not a level playing field as a weak and divided Palestine more easily enables Israel to imply a guise of extreme and even illegal security measures to further illegally annex territory for colonisation.

These are high international crimes, and reasonably, quite antagonising to the native populations.

Israel, for that dreadful policy of lebensraum, is in control of the viability of Palestinians, but chooses to maintain oppression all for state strategic purposes. Potential Palestinian success and sovereignty is the number one obstacle to the implementation of a greater and more expansive state of Israel.

The Palestinian Authority (now a recognised state government, though just of the West Bank), rather than the militant wing or even political wings of Hamas, is conducting a unilaterally peaceful, diplomatic, and a just way forward with the avocation of civil disobedience in their occupied land against the aggressors, in combination with a route to achieve a semblance of state sovereignty and a gained UN seat to lobby for criminal charges and further condemnation against Israel expansionist actions. These Israeli action along with the brutal ghettoization of Gaza, provide a Machiavellian mechanism of both dividing any possibility of a Palestinian unity government, plus a ready bogeyman to distract and demonise for Israel’s propaganda PR blitzes of its good against evil.

Yes, Israel did de-colonise from the Gaza strip, in favour of supplemented colonisation with expanded annexation in through the West Bank. A regular PR line of Israel is to keep repeating that withdrawal of Gaza without heed to its growing high crimes to the east. Gaza has long been densely populated, unlike the diverted focus to far more sparse West Bank regions for expropriation, annexation, and colonisation. With Israeli ghettoization and now fairly regularly destructive military invasions, to Israel’s long term strategic advantage for state territorial expansion to the east, Gaza has been willfully fostered into a powderkeg and demagogue.

Israeli action outside of its state borders fail a moral stiff test. It is not hyperbole to correctly and accurately align historical pogroms and contemporary legal language against Israeli extra-jurisdictional crimes. A charged language is apt as the accurate parallels with history are damning indictments of Israeli state action:

· As Germany of the past, Israel has a state policy of lebensraum. Ironically, rather than Germanise lands beyond its border, Israel is applying its military to Zionise extra-territorial lands and displace its undesirable residents. "We are short of land, we are short of air, let us breathe in this country." Distasteful echoes of the past ring true today.

Suddenly we are short of space here in Israel, which has become full to capacity and needs lebensraum. Every cultured person knows that this is a despicable German concept, banned from use because of the associations it brings up. Still, people are starting to use it, if not outright then with a clear implication: We are short of land, we are short of air, let us breathe in this country.

When we embarked on the Six-Day War did we want to remove a threat or did we want to gain control in order to spread out? That's what happens after 44 years of mire and moral corruption,

which distort things and make us forget the original objective and replace it with an entirely different one. We were fortunate when we occupied the West Bank because had we not done so, where would we have come to live? And who knows how high housing prices would have risen? The divine promise is now being revealed in all its ability to prophesy about real estate.

The founding fathers, as opposed to the Diadochi who fought for control after Alexander the Great's death, represented a different approach, for the most part. Between "A little goes a long way," and "Don't bite off more than you can chew," they chose to bite; they even agreed to the 1947 UN partition plan for lack of choice. They believed that all the objectives of rational Ben Gurion-style Zionism could be fulfilled even in "Lesser Israel," which is more complete and more at peace with itself. And it has no need for lebensraum, may God preserve us.

· Israel has long implemented policies akin to apartheid with militarily enforced separate areas and separate laws in the West Bank. Palestinians are subverted in favour of Israeli while only those Israeli colonists, rather than their subjugated Palestinian neighbours, are granted a political say upon state policy by Israel.

Balanced, condemnation upon Israel is not warranted out of its simple existence nor the presence of Jews, but of that state's extra-territorial policies and actions. So, also please avoid a the expected trivial misrepresentation for no peace being achievable simply due to hate for Jews or that myself, a Jew, gets-off "Jew-baiting" by presenting comparisons to a convicted Germany...

Those in rabid and absolute defence of Israel will again likely cry with hyperbole over such applicable language, then I call for a new tact. Try avoiding the familiar arguments into ad nauseum and ‘Jew-hating’ or ‘anti-Semitic’ tarring against internet messengers, and to constructively put an end to the likes of applicably vile language against Israel. You can accomplish this via turning to a rationale course of action by pressuring Israel to cease its condemnable actions.

That promoting and applauding in favour of Zionist expansionist (not that a title of Zionism should equate to evil, rather unilateral territorial expansion is a crime) is antagonistic and ought to be reasonable concluded as such to every honest witness. Do such high crimes warrant crimes of humanity attacks upon Israeli civilians, as per more personal terrorism and indiscriminate rocket attacks? No. Yet those actions represent a minority of belligerents and most certainly do not give a pass to the continued and disproportionately greater instigating crimes by Israel.

In the context of Israeli occupation, subjugation, and colonising of the West Bank of Palestine, categorising what is to be unjust is fairly easy:

Charter of the United Nations: Article I:
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

United Nations Declaration of Human Rights
· without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
· Article 9
o No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
· Article 13
o (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
o (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
· Article 15
o (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
o (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
· Article 17
o (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Though the above are mostly ideals, some points have been ratified into international law, particularly those ratified and signed by the state of Israel.

An above point there of all having a right to nationality, was directly born out of the aftermath of WWII with mass-refugees and the struggle of sovereign state borders through to that of the founding of the state of Israel as home for some stateless Jews. A lesson of that conflict was an enabler to high crimes against humanity was to deny a people their identity or nationality. When considering Palestinians, an occurrence that is now commonly practiced in simple forums as this, to even high international forum such as the UN General Assembly. People have a sovereign right to identity, and to deny such an identity is an enabler to deny and confiscate property, through to the demeaning treatment and expulsion of such an identified group, all for the strategic territorial goals of supremacist ethnic cleansing.

The self-determination of Palestinians is directly offensive to Israeli state policy, as it further complicates and deters the expansionist colonisation of the state of Israeli into jurisdiction beyond its borders, tough occupied by the IDF.

Definition of Aggression, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX).
Article 5:
3. No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful.
Article 7
Nothing in this Definition, and in particular article 3, could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom and independence, as derived from the Charter, of peoples forcibly deprived of that right and referred to in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination: nor the right of these peoples to struggle to that end and to seek and receive support, in accordance with the principles of the Charter and in conformity with the above-mentioned Declaration.

Reaffirming such post-WWII international law, here are some of the historically sanctioned and recorded legal international views, that also include that of your USA:

United Nations Resolution 242 (November 1967) - The situation in the Middle East:
..
Emphasizingthe inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,
1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

United Nations Resolution 3236 (November 1974) - Question of Palestine:
Recognizing that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,
Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,
Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,
1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:
1. (a) The right to self-determination without external interference;
2. (b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

Internationally, on a state-per-state basis, Israel is absolutely isolated upon a view of legal annexation and colonisation of extra-jurisdictional territory. Driving partisanship, Prime Minister Harper of Canada has been both praised and critiqued for his unwavering support for Israel, yet even the government that he leads is unequivocal upon the illegality of Israeli aggression:

Foreign Affairs

Status of Jerusalem

Canada considers the status of Jerusalem can be resolved only as part of a general settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute. Canada does not recognize Israel's unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem.

Occupied Territories and Settlements
Canada does not recognize permanent Israeli control over territories occupied in 1967 (the Golan Heights, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip). The Fourth Geneva Convention applies in the occupied territories and establishes Israel's obligations as an occupying power, in particular with respect to the humane treatment of the inhabitants of the occupied territories. As referred to in UN Security Council Resolutions 446 and 465, Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The settlements also constitute a serious obstacle to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace.

Canada believes that both Israel and the Palestinian Authority must fully respect international human rights and humanitarian law which is key to ensuring the protection of civilians, and can contribute to the creation of a climate conducive to achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement.

The Barrier
Canada recognizes Israel's right to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks, including through the restriction of access to its territory, and by building a barrier on its own territory for security purposes. However, Canada opposes Israel's construction of the barrier inside the West Bank and East Jerusalem which are occupied territories. This construction is contrary to international law under the Fourth Geneva Convention. Canada not only opposes Israel's construction of a barrier extending into the occupied territories, but also expropriations and the demolition of houses and economic infrastructure carried out for this purpose.

Israeli occupation, subjugation, and colonisation of Palestinian land is immoral, criminal, and as specified -- unjust. As far as states go, Israel is alone upon challenging this. If you choose to side with Israel in such opposition, then your perception of justice is quite incorrect.

With full support of legal citations through the legal and public diplomatic positions of the state of Israel’s closest allies, I have firmly displayed the illegality of Israeli actions. Further, with firm conviction and rational, I view the isolation and regular military invasions of Gaza (even Lebanon) serve the Israeli policy position of fostering/provoking extremism and surreptitiously prolonging any chance of achievable peace settlements, all to divide a nation of Palestine, deny the unity of such an already recognised state, and thereby permit the backhanded continuance of high crimes of aggression in the form of annexation and expropriation of territory beyond the state borders of Israel, all for the greater supremacist expansion and growth of a greater Israel.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Of course Whiskey16 has no leg to stand on....
UN resolutions mean nothing -- the UN has been highly pro-Palestine!
The World Court means nothing AND Has no enforcement powers....

This my take on the whole thing......the past is the past!
Means nothing now...

First of all let me say that it is just tragic that Palestinian children and parents are dying! It is very sad...

But lets ask the bigger question -- Whose fault is it?
If it`s your father or uncle or brother who is firing those rockets into Israel..whose fault is it really?


Do you really expect the Israeli`s not to retaliate?

To understand this better we need to look at thee Hamas Charter...which even though the rook out article 10......their leaders as of 2012 had called for the destruction of Israel....
Yet even now the charter calls for the murder of Jews in general...

Hamas doesn`t care if they kill Israeli citizens...but they don`t care if Palestinian civilians die...for Hamas until recently having Palestinians die has been a huge public relations coup for Hamas!! To Hamas that is a win, win!!

It has been said that Israel is using a missile defense system to protect its citizens and Hamas is using it`s citizens to protect it`s missiles!

If Hamas had the opportunity they would kill the maximum number Israeli`s they could....
Yet Israel has the opportunity to kill way more people and they do not.....

An amazing fact -- I thought this was comical of sorts --
If you are Israel you have to win every war or military engagement.....to continue to be Israel you cannot go 8 and 1.....[/B


Then we have the fact that everybody wins when that region of the world is peaceful! At present nobody is winning....both sides will win when the region is in peace!!

The Palestinian people have made some very bad choices of their own leaders and are victimized by their leaders...

Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005.....it`s not occupying Gaza.
Then the Palestinians elected Hamas in 2007!

Truth be told Israel doesn`t want to be in Gaza...Israel wants to take out tunnels and missile launchers and leave Gaza...

If Hamas truly cared about the Palestinians people they would have built underground shelters for the people! Instead they built tunnels to smuggle and hide missile launchers...

 

[Caravaggio]

Got a link to that?

Yes. Norseman has provided one.

There are several others.
Just google "Palestinian's killing caught on camera". It will patch you through to Aljezeera. There's the video.

If you don't trust Aljezeera, go to the UK news source Channel 4 and use their replay facility to watch last night's (21 July) broadcast. Half came from Sderot, which you will recognise and half from Gaza, including film from Shujaiya. Shujaiya has been shelled for hours, it is there that the man in the green T-shirt was killed.

The video is also easily available on youtube. It was uploaded at 12.51, local yesterday.

BBC radio 4 (consistently voted the world's most trusted news source) had an interesting item this morning at 06.53 UTC or 09.53 IDT. You can listen to this on the BBC I-player facility.

The two protagonists were Jewish women. One a rabbi, the other a woman who has just torn-up her Israeli passport in disgust at Israel's excess in Gaza. The latter said that it is almost impossible to be an anti-Israel Jew in the UK. Jews critical of Israel are shunned by their communities, their children are threatened with expulsion from Jewish schools and they are told they will be refused a Jewish burial.

Don't take my word for it, listen to it on BBC I-player....

 

[Caravaggio]

To Whiskey 16 re: 46.
Excellent work.

 

[Caravaggio]

Of course Whiskey16 has no leg to stand on....
UN resolutions mean nothing -- the UN has been highly pro-Palestine!
The World Court means nothing AND Has no enforcement powers....

Not so, the international criminal court at The Hague has tried people for war crimes and has people in prison there when they have been found guilty. See former Yugoslavia ethnic cleansing trials, still ongoing.

This my take on the whole thing......the past is the past!
Means nothing now...

How very odd! I bet you don't mind remembering Holocaust Memorial Day or 9/11.

Somehow I doubt that you can remember any Zionist atrocities leading up to the declaration of Israel's independence?
Heard of the Deir Yassin massacre?
The bombing of the King David Hotel?

Far from turning your back on history, why not confront it with a little reading from the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe; read The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. (2006)
Make the effort to read IDF Archives, 49/6127, File 117, 13th April to 27 September1948. That admission of ethnic cleansing by the IDF might just surprise you.