I am not well-versed in your history and everything you wrote was news to me. I can see the Jewish perspective now and understand why Israelis act the way they do. It's much less one-sided than I had imagined. I wonder why through all the pro-Israel stances, none of them blast out this history, as this alone, and nothing else I've heard (mostly sob stories) makes the Israeli case.
The problem with his statement is that it is the effect of Israelis deliberately encouraging their own people to filter out any information that doesn't portray the Arab world in the worst light. For example, Israeli intelligence created MEMRI TV
to rebroadcast the absolutely most insane Islamist and nationalist elements from the Muslim world, to encourage the idea that the average Muslim in the street thinks like that. Many of the beliefs Boltz mentioned are correct—but only for the most radical unhinged impotent-rage-type leaders in the Middle East.
Israeli actually is indeed a Anglo-European-initiated and -centred project. Not only were the earlier waves of Zionist migration entirely Ashkenazi, but the very idea of Zionism appeared first among the Protestant-Calvinist sects centred in England (and in fact, nearly none of the Mainland European Christian churches supported it, except individual preachers who had close ties to England)
The mass migration of Jews from anywhere to Israel was only possible because the British permitted it. 45% of Israeli Jews claim Ashkenazi ancestry, and this 45% is better educated and wealthier than the rest of them, a first class citizen if you will. The Mizrahi Jews of the Middle East only started getting threatened by Muslims after the Zionist settlers started having conflicts with the Palestinian Arabs, and these hostility was meant to stop the Jews from going to Israel with either threats or violence (by this time, Jews and Arabs were already killing each other in Mandatory Palestine). In terms of origins, the conflict is clearly European in origin, with Arabs as only a reactive party.
So here our Jewish friend has the problem of conflating all of the different conflicts his ethnic group as accumulated with others. For him, many Jews, and the US-led sheep herd, the Nazi extermination of Jews is equated to the Palestinian Arabs who were then-fighting to stop mass immigration (which society has ever reacted well to this, even without the express goal of creating a new state? And the violence came from both sides even back then), which is equated to Arabs elsewhere trying to assist their ethnic compatriots. Therefore, if reactive Arabs = aggressor Nazis, therefore, expelling Palestinian Arabs from their homes and refusing to let refugees return = expelling Sudeten, Baltic, Prussian etc Germans from their homes, as the Soviets did. therefore, Israel seizing Golan = Poland and USSR annexing Silesia, Prussia and Pomerania. Therefore, Bombing of Dresden = Bombing of Gaza, Jenin, Lebanon etc. That's how they justify to themselves completely disproportionate retaliation: by telling themselves (falsely) that the Arabs started the conflict. If you conflate everyone's grievances against you, then don't be surprised if they all start cooperating against you.
Imagine if Chinese used this logic. We can bomb, annex land, and expel anyone who cooperated with the Japanese, because the US-Japanese alliance is currently a threat to us and keeps publishing genocidal messages on social media. Thai military class, Philippines' cacique and S Korea's chaebol. Aung San, his Tatmadaw, and the country they created. Lee Kuan Yew and the country he created. Sukarno and the country he created.
