If this was a standard HP commenter, I'd just write it off as a bunch of lies and move on. But since it's an HP blogger and the comment got 18 favorites, I'm going to fisk it anyway.
"Suddenly immigrants from Europe come, not like the small Jewish population that always stayed in Jerusalem for religious reasons but to settle the whole land i.e. take it away from the local population."The Jews "from Europe" did not come to "settle the whole land." The original goal of Zionism was to form a Jewish homeland of any size. Some wanted the whole land, certainly, but most were content to share the land with the Arabs. Ben-Gurion himself stated that, "We do not wish, we do not need to expel the Arabs and take their place. All our aspirations are built upon the assumption — proven throughout all our activity in the Land — that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs." The partition plan, which the Jews accepted and the Palestinians did not, did not give "the whole land" to the Jews. But why tell the truth about history and the Zionist intentions towards Israel when you've got Palestinian murder to defend! After all, it's "only natural" to "resist" foreigners as next door neighbors! Who hasn't done that? This is exactly what a representative from Electronic Intifada would say, so it's hardly surprising that MJ Rosenberg uses the same talking points.
"The Arabs who controlled 100% of the land before the Israelis came..."First, note Rosenberg called the Jews traveling to Palestine "Israelis," even though Israel had not come into existence yet so they were not and could not be Israelis. In fact, he never refers to them as Jews in the entire comment! Why? Probably because calling them Jews suggests not only that they aren't foreigners but part of a people with a deep and ancient connection to Israel, but also that Palestinian opposition to them is based on anti-Semitism not "natural resistance" to "colonialism".
Second, the Arabs controlled 0% of the land before the Jews came, not 100%. The British Mandate of Palestine is an historic fact, not to mention the other empires that came before it, it's not part of the "Zionist narrative" that Rosenberg can just wave away whenever he feels like it. This statement that the Arabs controlled 100% of the land is nothing more or less than a lie. Either that or he's a moron who just doesn't know basic historical facts.
But don't look now, here comes another lie:
"The Arabs who controlled 100% of the land before the Israelis came are now willing to accept just 22%, allowing Israel to have the other 78%."Which Arabs is MJ Rosenberg referring to? If he's referring to the Palestinian Arabs, then not only does their democratically elected leadership disagree with him, but 1 in 3 Palestinians still demand the right of return to Israel, which would destroy Israel and return control of 100% of the land to the Palestinians.
Let's not forget that his entire article preceding this was how about how terrible the occupation is and it's an affront to humanity. The classic occupation two-step in action: Scream endlessly about how the occupation is the most evil thing on earth, then immediately start coming up with excuses for why you can't make peace and end it. The Palestinians and their apologists like Rosenberg do it all the time.
I only have two questions now: Does MJ Rosenberg actually believe the stuff he is spewing or is he willfully lying to make his argument stronger? And why is the Huffington Post allowing this liar to publish content on their website?