U.K. Zionist Federation refuses to accept left-wing pro-Israel movement

not it is not surprising and is also a world economic problem etc. and thats why they are left and ziniost i think are right. and this although they are bouth israely jews and so here i think its time the parties envoleved work together and put their money and energy on one goal in mind rebuild salomos temple. and i think because leftis dont like money and rights do like money and some people will do anything for money and some just wont.

No place for them in the ZF.

I have attended meetings of Yachad and other groups where leaders of Yachad have been present, and at all of them they have either been angry with Israel or Israelis, or have tried to undermine Israel. I was educated at the Hebrew University in 1973-6 and most of that the time since then have supported Labour and currently support Yesh Atid. I am not a right-winger. When I see a group of non Israelis attacking the positions of Israel and of most Israelis, while supporting without (in my hearing) any criticism the positions of the Palestine Authority, then my conclusion is that they are NOT pro-Israeli. In my view calling themselves pro-Israel is just 1984 style double-speak. The Zionist Federation aren't frightened of them, they just don't believe that they are a Zionist group. Speaking for myself I don't believe that they are a Zionist group either, but I most certainly do believe that Peace Now is a Zionist group.

That there are mainstream Jews and committed Zionists who do not agree with government policy? That their views may resonate with other Jews and challenge them to no longer give their blind support to everything that Israel does? That the international community may be swayed by what these Jews think? A confident Israel (and its affiliates) would welcome every opportunity to embrace its critics from within its own community to show how misguided they are. Yet this decision by the ZF simply echoes what Israel has been trying to do in recent years; to stifle those seek to present an alternative narrative for Israel. Only those who doubt themselves have to try and gag others! Yachad's core message is that there must be 2 viable states between the Med and the Jordan. The ZF says that an organisation that thinks like this must be shunned. Draw your own conclusions.

Due to irrevocable religious and nationalistic dogma, Arabs are sworn not to give up a so-called "Right of Return" to Israel proper and thus not to recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish nation-state. By reviving the '48 armistice borders, a 2-state solution would render Israel militarily indefensible against such sworn enemies and only serve to advance the 1974 PLO Phased Plan one step further. Any Jewish person that advocates for such a plan, knowingly or unknowingly is working for Israeli national suicide and thus serves the agenda of Israel's enemies. If Arabs really wanted peace, they would be advocating for a 3-state solution composed of Israel, Egypt and Jordan (the already-existing Palestinian-Arab state in everything but name), whereby Arab-inhabited parts of the West Bank would be incorporated into the latter, while affording Israel viable borders.

I'm sorry to state that the ZF is not the home for a nuanced debate on Israel is simply balderdash. Please read the ZF press release on the matter of Yachad. It explicitly states that The ZF is a strong supporter of the two state solution and the peace process in the third paragraph. http://zionistfederation.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/national-council-votes-on-yachad.html As someone who is a supporter of the two state solution and the ZF, I along with many others have never been stymied. The ZF contains members from the left, the right, Jew and Non Jew, Young and Old, Male and female, secular and religious and nobody I repeat nobody is not allowing them to debate issues such as settlements etc. Also the decision was a unanimous decision made by all ZF member affiliates after havign over 2 months to discuss the issue. I think we should respect their democratic right. Clearly ZF is a place where discussion can be heard and the vote and the discussion on the matter is the case in point. Unfairly this article seems to unfairly malign the ZF, without being in full disposal of the facts!