10 Questions PRO-Palestinians Can’t Answer (Can You Prove Me Wrong?) – Question 1

The YouTube algorithm tends to feed you up stuff that you wouldn’t personally choose but which nonetheless interests you when you see it. Recently, I’ve been following the events in Gaza. This has had the effect of filling my feed with pro-Israeli content. Most of it seems to be produced either directly or indirectly by the Israeli government. Like most such propaganda from all sources, it’s not only misleading and untruthful it also almost unwatchable. All propaganda is like this. Even when you agree with it, you don’t actually want to watch it.

One exception though were some videos produced by somebody who calls himself Travelling Israel. These do seem to be authentic. Unless the dark arts have deceived me, he’s a normal inhabitant of Israel and one who is very supportive of this country. That’s something that’s quite interesting. It’s not easy to hear the ordinary people over the noise.

His video of “10 questions Pro Palestinians cannot answer is a good example.” It’s not tremendously slick or polished, and the presenter doesn’t have the skills of a professional. But he is obviously passionate about what he’s talking about. And he picked a good attention seeking title. I instantly wanted to know what these questions were, and whether I could answer them or not. Let’s go through them one by one.

1. Why are you interested in Palestine?

There are lots of injustices in the world so why do people home in on the Palestinian one rather than all the others?

TI proposes that there are only two answers to this question. Either you expect more of Israel than other countries. This makes you racist. Or you think it’s cool to support the Palestinians. In which case you are a hypocrite.

This is a fairly common talking point put forward by Reilly partisans. It doesn’t really stand up. The calm and logical answer is that Palestinian refugees are the largest current group of refugees and the one whose plight has been longest standing. So it’s quite natural that people whose interest is human rights should focus on this particular one.

However, that isn’t why I am interested in this issue. Israel is a European colony. The Israeli’s are clearly part of western culture. Zionism is one form of nationalism which originated in Europe. We all know Jews and they know us. Israeli government spokesmen have American or European accents fairly often. There is one that gets on the television quite a lot at the moment whose accent I could pin down to a particular part of the UK. Eretz Israel? More like Ersatz Israel.

Israel is an ally of the UK and our military help them materially. There is a British military base on Cyprus and it has actively supported Israel in the recent conflict. So as a citizen I have at least in theory a stake in what is going on and I am entitled to take an interest in how my taxes are being used. But there’s also a more deepseated feeling that Israel is on my team and the way they behave reflects on me. It’s a bit like when a baby cries on a plane it is annoying. When your baby cries on a plane it is embarrasing as well.

2. Oppressed People of the Middle East – why pick on the Palestinians when there are so many other causes deserving of sympathy?

The Middle East is a patchwork of cultures and traditions. It is more surprising how little conflict between the groupings there is than that there are arguments between them. But our presenter doesn’t seem especially well informed on what is in his backyard. He cites the Copts in Egypt, Christians in Lebanon whose numbers are declining and Zoroastrians in Iran. I don’t know how hard done by these communities feel, but none of them are militarily occupied. He picks out
The Kurds as the people who have the worst deal. The Kurds do share with the Palestinians the issue of wanting self/determination which is currently being denied to them. I don’t know much about the details, but I do know that they have actively fought to change the situation. That seems to me to be something that a nation being oppressed is entitled to resort to if there is no peaceful route to resolving it. Why shouldn’t the Palestinians do the same?

I did pick up an interesting titbit from this section of the video. Nobody has heard of the Halabjah massacre, according to TI, but the Dier Yassin massacre is very well known.

Well I simply don’t think this is true in the UK. The gassing of the Kurds by the Iraqi goverment on Saddam Hussein was widely reported at the time and I remember it very well. It was big news and caused widespread revulsion. And some people brought up the comparison with a similar operation advocted in Britain in the 1920s. Churchill himself no less. It wasn’t actually used but it a a was authorised. It got another round of publicity in the runup to the first Iraq war as a justification for British participation. It is well enough known for Sacha Baron Cohen to use a joke about something smelling bad enough that “you could gas the Kurds with that”.

We all need to remember that the newsfeed in different countries is very different. But it is not the case that only Jewish attrocities get coverage. In the UK it’s closer to say that it’s the opposite.

As to the Dier Yassin massacre – I discovered it on July 13 2025. I hadn’t previously heard about it. I know the date because I posted about it on Bluesky to see if it was common knowledge. It wasn’t. It was an incident where Jewish terrorists drove the inhabitants from their village with considerable loss of life. As is always the case, the details are disputed. But the inhabitants aren’t there any more and it is now occupied by Israelis.

3. Stolen Land – ‘Give me one Jewish settlement founded before November 1947’

The significance of this date and indeed the wording of this question isn’t obvious. Settling on other people’s land would count as theft whatever the date. The November 1947 date presumably comes from the release of a United Nations proposal for a partition. This proposal was highly favourable to the colonists, offering them over half the territory of Palestine. So unsurprisingly they accepted it. The Palestinians didn’t. It is very obvious that a proposal by a third party to settle a dispute still needs the agreement of both parties to the dispute. This is so obvious that it is hard to believe anyone could seriously misunderstand it.

But I think that this maybe is a story that Israelis tell one another. The United Nations gave us this land, and if the Palestinians didn’t accept it well that is down to them. And when neighbouring states tried to put a stop to the establishment of Israel then it was them that were breaking the settlement imposed by the UN. Something so convenient and comforting has to be true.

4. Why wasn’t an independent Palestinian established between 1948 and 1967?

The Arab countries were not prepared for the war. The Jews were. The Cold War was just getting started and the Soviet Union was very happy to supply the enemies of Britain. The Communist government of Chzeckoslovakia had ample stocks of ex-German military equipment and ammunition available. Superpowers supporting proxies with arms to extend their influence was to become a common theme in the Middle East. Why wasn’t an independent Palestinian state established. The details could fill a book, and probably do somewhere. But the ultimate reason was probably simply that the newly arrived colonists had a better understanding of the Europeans, Russians and Americans and could work the system better to their advantage.

5. Egypt – Why didn’t Arab countries welcome Palestinian refugees?

The Arab countries were entirely rational in their opposition to the establishment of the Jewish state being established by Zionists. They had made clear that they wanted a state strong enough to protect the interests of Jews everywhere. Its population was to be exclusively Jewish and its borders in line with biblical Judea. This can only be done by removing the existing population.

The most convenient way for this to happen is if neighbouring countries welcome them. This isn’t impossible. Britain had little trouble absorbing the Hugenots and the Uganda Asians when they were forced to flee their homes. America has thrived on various flavours of poor and huddled masses over the years. And Jordan did welcome a very large number of Palestinian refugees, with some problems but largely successfully. But it’s a numbers game. There’s only so many immigrants a country can cope with without creating political problems. There are a lot of Palestinians. And given that they didn’t want to leave and have always had a realistic prospect of returning, they do present a bigger political problem for their hosts than most refugees. Egypt recognises Palestine as a state and supports the two state proposition. It has no obligation to go any further than that no matter how convenient it would be for Israel if it did.

6. Genocide – How do you justify the use of the word genocide when there are more Palestinians than ever before?

The use of the term genocide to describe the activities of the Israeli state is recent and refers specifically to the military operation in Gaza. I doubt very much that the. population of Gaza has been increasing recently. The figure quoted for Palestinian deaths seems to be around 60,000. That’s about 3% of the prior population of 2.2 million. The rate of population growth in Jordan is 1%, so there has been a net reduction of Palestinians. They were all human beings. Genocide seems the right word to me, but I suppose some people might settle to describe it as mass murder. To be fair, the video is from a year ago. The Israeli government is now preventing aid from being distributed leading to starvation. I don’t think the deaths from this have been estimated yet. The terminology is probably not the most important thing.

7. Blacks and Palestinians

The video doesn’t actually come up with a question in this section. It’s just an assertion that Arabs are racist against black people, while simultaneously claiming to be the indigenous dark skinned people. Arabs used to keep slaves and only stopped when the colonial countries stopped them. Maybe the question is
“What’s wrong with colonialism if it abolishes slavery?”

I don’t doubt that there are Arabs with racist opinions. There are racists everywhere. That’s not a reason to drive them from their homes.

But while we are on the subject, there are many downsides to colonialism. One that isn’t talked about much but which is very real, is that colonists often don’t have the optimum genes for the environment of the place they are colonising. A good example of this is Australia where the pale skinned northern Europeans who settled there have very high rates of skin cancer. The Australian government encourages the use of sunscreen to overcome this. Israel does the same thing. TI should probably follow this advice. His skin colour looks better suited to Britain or Germany than where he is currently living.

8. The state of Palestine. “How is it that when you go to archaeological sites you never find Palestinian artifact but you do find Jewish artifacts 2,000 year old Hebrew texts?”

I don’t think it is actually true that Jewish artefacts are the only ones that are found in archeological investigations in Israel. But even if it is, that is not a grounds for removing the current occupents. It doesn’t what anyone digs up in Stone Henge, we are not going to hand over half the UK if some Druids turn up claiming that their Gods promised it to them 3,000 years ago.

The DNA evidence is that for all the comings and goings of empires, the actual population of both Isreal and Palestine is pretty closely related to the people who lived in the area in biblical times. That should not have any bearing on the rights of any human living in the area today. But it does scotch the theory that the Jews are the original inhabitants and the Palestinians are latercomers.

9 Treatment of Women

Once again, we don’t get an actual question requiring an answer here. This is simply an assertion that Hamas operatives raped women and Israel soldiers don’t. The fact is that in wars men rape the women of their enemies often if the opportunity arises. I don’t believe there is any hard evidence that either side has done so in this particular conflict. But I’d expect that both sides have and the stories will come out eventually. The Israeli armed forces have had more opportunities, so it is possible they’ll have a worse charge sheet.

TI is still young. I was happier when I thought that British people were uniquely virtuous. But long experience of life and much reading of history has made me realise that all humans are flawed regardless of their origin.

Would a Palestinian state have terrible policies towards women and gays? Maybe. Iran does. But Lebanon doesn’t. That’s not a reason to deny the Palestinians statehood and not to recognise their human rights.

10 Tell Me Who Your Friends Are

“Why do pro-Palestinian protestors behave so badly?”

When large demonstrations occurred in the UK protesting about the treatment of the Palestinians, I assumed that there would be a stream of bad press coming. There were lots of people who felt very strongly gathering with others who shared their outrage. It sounded like a recipe for trouble and front pages undermining the cause they were supporting. There are a lot of very prominent potential targets that they might have vented their anger on in ways that would have looked very bad on camera.

I posted that prediction on X – but you’ll have to take my word for it as I’ve closed my account.

To my surprise, the demonstrators have been well behaved and dignified. The press have tried quite hard to talk up some very minor incidents.

My question is, why does our YouTube friend think the opposite? (Of course I am assuming he actually believes what he’s saying. He might simply be grifting rather than proselytising. There’s a lot of money in outrage driven clicks).

I don’t imagine my arguments will carry much weight with TI and his fellow partisans. If it has any effect at all, it will encourage him to hone his arguments more carefully. my main motivation in answering his questions with to clear my own mind and make sure that my opinions are well-founded. If we want to solve this dispute people take clear thinking. I don’t think that the two state solution will work. I also don’t think that there is any longer and concession that Israel can make that will satisfy its opponents in the Middle East. I suppose it’s possible that they will give up. But it doesn’t seem likely. It’s hard to imagine Israel being beaten all the time it has the full support of the United States. And it’s hard to imagine the United States failing to support it. I know public opinion has turned against Israel recently. But it’s not in the nature of American democracy for the peoples preferences to count that much.

But Israel will not last forever. It is expensive both in terms of money and attention. Somebody is going to have to put their hands in their pockets. Somebody is going to have to devote their life to the defence of this tiny strip of land. People might say that they would rather die than give up their Jewish heritage. But there was a time when British people might have said that they would rather die than give up their Protestant heritage. Only a declining number in Northern Ireland would say that now. You only get a few chances to be brave and heroic in the face of danger. Most of the time it’s just a grind.

The most likely way for this all to end is if the Israelis themselves give up on their project. this is after all how both the Soviet Union and apartheid South Africa ended. It is not necessary for all Israel to bail out. It just needs enough to leave for the manning of the defence forces to fall below the minimum level. This will force the remainder to finally start making some concessions. The story of Israel has been dramatic and full of pathos and tragedy. But the best ending is if it simply fizzles out.