     The Gazan | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 08:43 am
This is a letter from a Palestinian American to the National Association for Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) president. It is some amazing historic quotes that deserves saving for this and future generations to read.
Mr. Julian Bond
NAACP, President
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215
Dear Mr. Bond and members of the NAACP,
I am the daughter of Palestinian refugees who were expelled from their
homes at gun point in 1967. I want to express my deep sadness at seeing your
signature in the NY Times in support of Israel, a government that has
systematically, for decades, oppressed and enslaved the native Palestinian
population.
Your support of Israel is a stand against a society fighting for freedom.
It is a stand against International law and against the will of the
International community. It is a stand against the principles of human
decency. Your support of Israel is a stand FOR discrimination, home
demolition, land confiscation, water allocation disparity, daily humiliation
of a society, checkpoints, different colored ID cards and license plates,
segregated housing, segregated schooling, torture, imprisonment without
charge or trial, deportation, dispossession..and the use of sharpshooters
against children as a means of "riot control."
Your support of Israel is in contravention of the spirit of the NAACP.
Rather than go into history and explain my people's side of the conflict,
I'd simply like to list a few words from the "horse's mouth," so to speak.
You might find some similarities to what was said against
African-Americans not too long ago.
"We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one
centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand.
We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us
on all fours."
* Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces - Gad
Becker,Yediot Ahronot 13 April 1983, New York Times 14 April 1983.
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs." * Menahim Begin,
speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, 'Begin and the "Beasts"',
New Statesman, 25 June 1982
"We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do
return"
* David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar
Zohar's Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
"We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon,
Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is
artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian
state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan;
Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on
and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai."
* David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A
Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the
cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
* Israel Koenig, "The Koenig Memorandum"
"If I was an Arab leader I would never make [peace] with Israel. That is
natural: we have taken their country."
* David Ben Gurion, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann,
Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.
"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even
know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because
geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab
villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul;
Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis;
and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single
place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."
* Moshe Dayan, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz,
April 4, 1969.
"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question,
What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his
hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'"
* Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the
New York Times, 23 October 1979; Rabin's description of the conquest of
Lydda, after the completion of Plan Dalet.
"We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and
waiters" Uri Lubrani, PM Ben-Gurion's special adviser on Arab Affairs, 1960.
From "The Arabs in Israel" by Sabri Jiryas.
"There are some who believe that the non-Jewish population, even in a high
percentage, within our borders will be more effectively under our
surveillance; and there are some who believe the contrary, i.e., that it is
easier to carry out surveillance over the activities of a neighbor than over
those of a tenant. [I] tend to support the latter view and have an
additional argument:...the need to sustain the character of the state which
will henceforth be Jewish...with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15
percent. I had already reached this fundamental position as early as 1940
[and] it is entered in my diary."
* Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency's Colonization Department.
From Israel: an Apartheid State by Uri Davis, p.5.
"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge
the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours...Everything
we don't grab will go to them."
* Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants
from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15,
1998.
"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and
courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The
first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization or Jewish State
without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."
Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.
"Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it
employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor
must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."
Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of
the Arabs of Palestine, Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 entry.
In closing, Mr. Bond, let me reiterate my disappointment. I come from a
proud but deeply violated people. It is a sad day when members (especially
high ranking ones) of the NAACP stand in support of oppression and
dehumanization of the Palestinians. It is a sad day indeed for all of us
desperately struggling to reclaim our identity, our dignity, and our
freedom. To fight against the unspeakable oppression is our duty. But to
have to combat complacency and ignorance of those who claim to fight for
justice is deeply disheartening. What happened to you since the days you
were out there fighting for justice?
Sincerely,
Susan Abulhawa
Palestinian in exile
From MSA News 25 Nov 2000 |
| MAD MAC | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 11:42 pm
Now this is an articulate woman. Well researched information, makes a clear cut case, keeps the drama out of it, which puts the drama into it. Most moving document I have read on this net. Gazan I don't know where you got it but that was a well written piece. I'd like to talk with this woman. Is there an address for her? |
| common | Saturday, January 06, 2001 - 07:42 am
Dear Sir/Madam
Having being a avid follower of the coverage of the Middle east crisis, in your paper please let me voice my concern. I am fortunate enough to belong neither to the "violence prone" arab community(letters december 2000) nor the "disaffected and discriminated" asian youth (jan 5 2001)so perhaps i may offer an opinion that is not sinisterly molded . Colin Shindler and and Amos Oz views on the Middle east peace process when combined draw some interesting conclusions . If the right of return for refugees Palestinian or otherwise is affront to Jewish self determination, does that not itself cast a doubt over Israel's legitimacy, indeed it seems the two authors themselves are thinking the unthinkable. I would be the first to applaud Israel's achievements in the field of education, however it would be perverse to imagine that this has been reflected by any real change in public policy if Colin Shindlers ideas of Israeli integrity were to extend to a survey of the tactics of Israeli tour Guides in Israel and the Occupied Territories and the axsphisation of Palestinian tour guides by the Israeli government perhaps he would find a less self congratulatory approach to article writing
It is truly offensive , when in the space of one article you reduce a faith with 1 billion adherents to a mixture of Witch hunt communism and the Nazism and in another article print an incoherent mumble about the forces that are fundamentalist Islam. Mr. Colin Shindlers article seemed to be complaining that the Hamas web page held zionists responsible for most of the worlds evils is the best way to re address such a balance, by offering no less an indictment on the Islamic faith?The fact that Israel is a 21 century colonial state, will not be disguised by either of these articles nor exposed by Hamas writing on zionists
it will , largely aided if you wish by the achievements of yet another generation of Israeli "new historians" reverberate through history, while tales of hunting have always favoured the hunter, the lion is learning to speak, perhaps that is the reason for dissatisfaction amongst asian youth in this Country, and african youth, and arab youth. If you imagine otherwise, then you imagine in a very Khaki wearing Rifle holding way. |
| common | Saturday, January 06, 2001 - 07:49 am
Dear Cedric, this is a copy, my e-mail was on "rich text format", i
didn't
know it was that rich,i think you are the only one who has problems
reading
my mail, at least the only one who has told me so.I am gonna send this
to a
couple of address to see if it came out okay.Please tell me if you get
a
coherant message, or if i am walking like an Eyptian again I am sorry
about my crazy account
Dear Cedric
Hi, how are you doing?, I have had a couple of knightmares getting this
togther, I won’t bother boring you with the details,the chinese say its
better to light a candle than to curse the darkness, I think they are
right,
so I will hold my tongue
It was reported in one of the letters sent to your webpage, that
effectively
there is no palestinian problem, that these people had voluntary left
after
Israel was attcaked by 5 Arab armies and Arab leaders had invited the
Palestinians under the auspices that after the elimination of Israel
they
would return. If this were the case then I would be the first to
conceed
perhaps the Palestinians deserve 50 years of squalar and oppression, to
live
under and around the borders of a brave nation. If this were true I
would
not be the first but among the first to agree that perhaps the
Palestinians
deserved Soldiers urinating in their water tanks, blocking their free
movemnet and the destruction of their homes. If the events described by
that
witer were true I would , due to human nature be rendered timid howver
by
Israeli acts of tortue and murder. Yet what if the situation descibed
by
that writer had no bearing on the truth?, was it not Plato that argued
that
the most unjust were those who pretend to be just, while beinmg unjust,
like
the footage I see on T.V of members of the IDF shooting unarmed
civilians
and then running bravely to conduct first aid, if you had concern for
that
life, you would not take it so easily.
Okay, I think it is neccesary to give a brief overview of the history
of
zionism, so we can have a framework for anaylsis which is accurate, I
think
it is directly related to the modern day situation of Palestinian
refugees
and God willing I will explain why.
The evolution of zionism and the emergence of Israel were responsible
for
creating the situation of Palestinian refugees. I do not wish to give a
partisan approach, but it is improtant that we dispel some myths and
correctly assert historically factually evidence. These are the main
points
I think I will be drawing out through the cousre of this e-mail.
1. Zionism and the Jewish Nation were throughout history separate, what
united them was the poltical motivations and ambitions of zionists.
2. The Zionist movement, had an active policy of depopulating Palestine
of
its Arab inhabitants from its inception
3. The zionist movement , had an active policy of deception, and a
prespondancy for subservience.
4. Finanlly the Zionist movemnet wholly responsible for the creation of
Palestinian refugees, this e-mail will attempt to explain why the
Israeli
assertion that Arabs are heavily responsible and the neutral
shakepearan
“Plague on both your houses” approach to the middle east are flawed
From the outset, After considering Cyprus, East Africa and the Congo,
with
the British, Italian, Belgian and German governments, Palestine became
popular , howver Palestine was at that time still an integral part of
the
Ottoman Empire. So theuy preceded with caution
According to a Herzl ( first president of the zionist
movemnet)associate,
Max Nordau:
"I did my best to persuade the claimants of the Jewish State in
Palestine
that we might find a circumlocution that would express all we meant,
but
would say it in a way so as to avoid provoking the Turkish rulers of
the
coveted land. I suggested "Heimstätte" as a synonym for "State" ...
This is
the history of the much commented expression. It was equivocal, but we
all
understood what it meant. To us it signified "Judenstaat" then and it
signifies the same now". 11/
In Herzl's words:
"No need to worry [about the phraseology]. The people will read it as
'Jewish State' anyhow". 12/
Leonard Stein, authoritative historian of zionism, writes:
"If their distrust of zionism was to be dispelled, there must be no
more
talk of a Charter or, even worse, of an international guarantee; still
less
must there be any room for the suspicion that the real purpose of the
Zionist movement was to detach Palestine from Turkey and turn it into a
Jewish State. However reluctant they might be to acknowledge that
Herzl's
ideas were outmoded, even the 'political' Zionists were forced to
recognize
that, without abandoning the essence of aspirations the movement must
change
its tactics". 13/
The words of another eminent Zionist historian, who participated in the
drafting of the Declaration, prove how the zionists begain to deploy
this
tactic in public
"It has been said and is still being obstinately repeated by
anti-Zionists
again and again, that zionism aims at the creation of an independent
'Jewish
State'. But this is wholly fallacious. The 'Jewish State' was never
part of
the Zionist programme". 14/
but in private
“It is most important that everything should be done to obtain
authority
from the commission in the eyes of the jewish world and at the same
time
allay arab suspicions regarding the true aims of zionism”
the direction was clear - the goal of zionism from the start was the
establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine. The rights of the people
of
Palestine themselves received no attention in these plans. While the
direction was clear, what was also becoming clear was that the zionist
were
willing to do anything to have their political goals realised
What the political concept of a Jewish State in Palestine needed to
give it
reality was to transfer people to Palestine. The religious and
spiritual
solidarity of the Jews in the Diaspora with the Holy Land had survived
over
the centuries. Despite the anti-Semitism in Europe,however only small
groups
had emigrated to Palestine to settle in Palestine for purely religious
sentiments. They numbered perhaps 50,000 at the end of the nineteenth
century, and personified, or symbolized, the Jewish link to Palestine
which
was, in essence, spiritual. If their was such a strong link to the
“holy
land” and considering the amount of anti semitism in Europe at the
time, why
was there such little migration to Palestine before the emergence of
zionism
as a political movement?. Could it be that the spirtual was used to
justify
the entirely political? The zionist begain exploiiting the persecution
suffereed by the Jewish nation in Europe
“
as a matter of fact, it is probable that the state of mind prevailing
in
centres(refugeee camps in Europe) is due to a combination of factors
which
all react upon one another. There is undoubtedly a certain element of
propaganda, and there is also an element of self-persuasion ... As
regards
propaganda, some actual evidence was seen in the form of posters and
written
material at some of the centres. In particular, at one centre a poster
was
noted with the inscription 'Palestine - a Jewish State for the Jewish
people' and also a large pictorial design showing Jews from eastern
Europe
on the march towards Palestine shown as a much larger area than the
present
geographical limits ..." 26/
In a separate note, a member of the Special Committee recorded:
"... It was admitted to us by Mr. Sommerfelt of the Preparatory
Commission
of the International Refugee Organization that considerable propaganda
is
being carried on by or on behalf of the Jewish Agency in the camps for
displaced persons with the object of inducing Jews to immigrate into
Palestine, although he found that those staying in these camps as a
general
rule agree, if they are afforded opportunities, to go to places other
than
Palestine ..." 27/
Zionist policies of territorial expansion
The Zionists drew on this ancient spiritual potential to build a
political
movement. A stirring slogan was spread abroad:
"A land without people for a people without land"
ignoring the fact that the Palestinians themselves, well over half a
million
at the turn of the century, lived in Palestine, and that it was their
home.
“we wish to point out here that the Jewsish population who lived there
before the war never had any trouble with their arab neighbours.They
enjoyed
the same rights and privileges as their fellew Ottoman citizens and
enver
agitated for the Declartion of Nov 1917. It was the zionists outside
Palestine who worked for the Balfour declaration”
The great Zionist humanist, Ahad Ha'am warned against the violation of
the
rights of the Palestinian people, and his words are well known in the
literature of Palestine.
"... Ahad Ha'am warned that the settlers must under no circumstances
arouse
the wrath of the natives ... 'Yet what do our brethren do in Palestine?
Just
the very opposite! Serfs they were in the lands of the Diaspora and
suddenly
they find themselves in unrestricted freedom and this change has
awakened in
them an inclination to despotism. They treat the Arabs with hostility
and
cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause and
even
boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and
dangerous inclination ...'
"... The same lack of understanding he found in the boycott of Arab
labour
proclaimed by Jewish labour ... 'Apart from the political danger, I
can't
put up with the idea that our brethren are morally capable of behaving
in
such a way to humans of another people, and unwittingly the thought
comes to
my mind: if it is so now, what will be our relation to the others if in
truth we shall achieve at the end of times power in Eretz Yisrael? And
if
this be the "Messiah": I do not wish to see his coming.'
"Ahad Ha'am returned to the Arab problem ... in February 1914 ... '[the
Zionists] wax angry towards those who remind them that there is still
another people in Eretz Yisrael that has been living there and does not
intend at all to leave its place. In a future when this illusion will
have
been torn from their hearts and they will look with open eyes upon the
reality as it is, they will certainly understand how important this
question
is and how great our duty to work for its solution'." 15/
It becomes necceasy at this point to mark out the differences between
the
zionists and the Jewish Nation
Foremost among Jewish critics was Sir Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State
for
India and the only Jewish member of the British Cabinet. His dissent
from
the political nature of Zionist aims stemmed from conviction that
Judaism
was a universal faith, distinct from nationality, and that in the era
of the
modern nation-State the Jewish people did not constitute a nation. He
questioned the credentials of the Zionist Organization to speak for all
Jews. In secret memoranda (later made public) he wrote:
"Zionism has always seemed to me to be a mischievous political creed,
untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United Kingdom ... I have
always
understood that those who indulged in this creed were largely animated
by
the restrictions upon and refusal of liberty to Jews in Russia. But at
the
very time when these Jews have been acknowledged as Jewish Russians and
given all liberties, it seems to be inconceivable that zionism should
be
officially recognized by the British Government, and that Mr. Balfour
should
be authorized to say that Palestine was to be reconstituted as the
'national
home of the Jewish people'. I do not know what this involves, but I
assume
that it means that Mohammedans and Christians are to make way for the
Jews,
and that the Jews should be put in all positions of preference and
should be
peculiarly associated with Palestine in the same way that England is
with
the English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mohammedans
in
Palestine will be regarded as foreigners, just in the same way as Jews
will
hereafter be treated as foreigners in every country but Palestine ...
When
the Jews are told that Palestine is their national home, every country
will
immediately desire to get rid of its Jewish citizens, and you will find
a
population in Palestine driving out its present inhabitants, taking all
the
best in the country ...
"I deny that Palestine is today associated with the Jews or properly to
be
regarded as a fit place for them to live in. The Ten Commandments were
delivered to the Jews on Sinai. It is quite true that Palestine plays a
large part in Jewish history, but so it does in modern Mohammedan
history,
and, after the time of the Jews, surely it plays a larger part than any
other country in Christian history ...
The zionist had a delebrate policy of depopulating the land of Arabs
before
any war , there is a contunity which runs throughout the history of
Zionism
and the creation of Israel, it has always been anti-arab
This territorial expansion by the use of force resulted in a
large-scale
exodus of refugees from the areas of hostilities. Palestinians allege
that
this was part of a deliberate policy to displace Palestinian Arabs to
make
room for immigrants, and quote Zionist sources, including Herzl:
"We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by
procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it
any
employment in our own country.
"Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be
carried out discreetly and circumspectly". 69/ Below are examples of
how
this principle of expelling the Palesntians, prior to any war was
acrried
out
"The Constitution of the Jewish Agency: Land Holding and Employment
Clauses
...
" d) Land is to be acquired as Jewish property and ... the same shall
be
held as the inalienable property of the Jewish people.
"e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish
labour ... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish
labour
shall be employed ..."
"Keren Kayemet draft lease: Employment of Jewish labour only
"... The lessee undertakes to execute all works connected with the
cultivation of the holding only with Jewish labour. Failure to comply
with
this duty by the employment of non-Jewish labour shall render the
lessee
liable to the payment of compensation ..."
"The lease also provides that the holding shall never be held by any
but a
Jew ..."
"Keren ha-Yesod agreements: Employment of labour
The following provisions are included:
'Article 7 - The settler hereby undertakes that ... if and whenever he
may
be obliged to hire help, he will hire Jewish workmen only.'
"In the similar agreement for the Emek colonies, there is a provision
as
follows:
'Article 11 - The settler undertakes ... not to hire any outside labour
except Jewish labourers.'" 74/
Commenting on the Zionist attitude towards the Palestinians, the report
noted the Zionist policy of allaying Arab suspicions:
"Yet still attempts are constantly being made to establish the
advantage
which Jewish settlement has brought to the Arab. The most lofty
sentiments
are ventilated at public meetings and in Zionist propaganda. At the
time of
the Zionist Congress in 1931 a resolution was passed which 'solemnly
declared the desire of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people,
to
develop the homeland common to both into a prosperous community which
would
ensure the growth of the peoples'. This resolution is frequently quoted
in
proof of the excellent sentiments which zionism cherishes towards the
people
of Palestine. The provisions quoted above, which are included in legal
documents binding on every settler in a Zionist colony, are not
compatible
with the sentiments publicly expressed."
It is clear that the zionist were doing what they said they had to do,
conduct a secret war against the Palestinian, why pretending to nurture
a
friendhsip
"
As the British Government progressively disengaged from Palestine, and
the
United Nations was unable to replace it as an effective governing
authority,
the Zionist movement moved to establish control over the territory of
the
nascent Jewish State. At the same time the bordering Arab States made
clear
that they would intervene.
From writings of Zionist leaders, it is evident that Zionist policy was
to
occupy, during the period of withdrawal, as much territory as possible
(including the "West Bank" beyond the boundaries assigned to the
Jewish
State by the partition resolution. A comprehensive military plan,
called
Plan "D" (or Dalet) was described by an Israeli official:
"In March 1948, Haganah High Command prepared a comprehensive
operational
Plan 'D', replacing plans 'A', 'B' and 'C' which had governed Haganah
strategy in previous years. Zero hour for Plan D was to arrive when
British
evacuation had reached a point where the Haganah would be reasonably
safe
from British intervention and when mobilization had progressed to a
point
where the implementation of a large-scale plan would be feasible. The
mission of Haganah was as simple as it was revolutionary: 'To gain
control
of the area allotted to the Jewish State and defend its borders, and
those
of the blocs of Jewish settlements and such Jewish population as were
outside those borders, against a regular or pararegular enemy operating
from
bases outside or inside the area of the Jewish State'". 66/
Again clear evidence that the Zionist were expanionist from the outset.
Begin writes:
"In the months preceding the Arab invasion, and while the five Arab
States
(Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Transjordan) were conducting
preparations
for concerted aggression, we continued to make sallies into the Arab
area.
In the early days of 1948, we were explaining to our officers and men,
however, that this was not enough. Attacks of this nature carried out
by any
Jewish forces were indeed of great psychological importance, and their
military effect, to the extent that they widened the Arab front and
forced
the enemies on to the defensive, was not without value. But it was
clear to
us that even most daring sallies carried out by partisan troops would
never
be able to decide the issue. Our hope lay in gaining control of
territory.
"At the end of January, 1948, at a meeting of the Command of the Irgun
in
which the Planning Section participated, we outlined four strategic
objectives: (1) Jerusalem; (2) Jaffa; (3) the Lydda-Ramleh plain; and
(4)
the Triangle.
"Setting ourselves these objectives we knew that their achievement
would be
dependent on many factors but primarily on the strength in men and arms
that
we would have at our disposal. We consequently decided to treat the
plans as
'alternatives': we would carry out what we could. As it happened, of
the
four parts of the strategic plan we executed only the second in full.
"In the first and third parts we were able to record important
achievements
on the battlefield - but we did not attain decisive victories.
"As for the fourth part, we were never allowed an opportunity even to
begin
to put the plan into operation. The conquest of Jaffa, however, stands
out
as an event of first-rate importance in the struggle for Hebrew
independence."
(The "Triangle" is explained as "the generally used name for the
Arab-populated area in the centre of western Eretz Yisrael lying
roughly in
a triangle whose points are the towns of Nablus, Jenin and Tulkarim and
comprising the bulk of the non-desert area west of Jordan which is now
outside the State of Israel".) 67/
Ben-Gurion writes:
"... Field troops and Palmach in particular were thus deployed and
quickly
showed the mettle that was soon to animate our army and bring it
victory.
"... New Jerusalem was occupied, and the guerrillas were expelled from
Haifa, Jaffa, Tiberias, Safad while still the Mandatory was present. It
needed sagacity and self-control not to fall foul of the British army.
The
Hagana did its job; until a day or two before the Arab invasion not a
settlement was lost, no road cut, although movement was seriously
dislocated, despite express assurances of the British to keep the roads
safe
so long as they remained. Arabs started fleeing from the cities almost
as
soon as disturbances began in the early days of December 1947. As
fighting
spread, the exodus was joined by bedouin and fellahin, but not the
remotest
Jewish homestead was abandoned and nothing a tottering Administration
(meaning the British Mandatory) could unkindly do stopped us from
reaching
our goal on May 14, 1948 in a State made larger and Jewish by the
Haganah
..." 68/
The first Palestinian exodus
Herzl's plans in respect of the size of the Jewish State are cited as
another item of evidence of this policy. Describing a 1939 meeting with
Churchill, Weizmann writes:
"... (I) thanked him for his unceasing interest in Zionist affairs. I
said:
'You have stood at the cradle of the enterprise. I hope you will see it
through'. Then I added that after the war we would want to build up a
State
of three or four million Jews in Palestine. His answer was: 'Yes, I
quite
agree with that'." 70/
Palestinians also charge that the terrorizing of the civilian
population
through military or psychological means was an integral part of this
policy
of expelling Palestinians, and again cite Zionist writings:
"... Between ourselves it must be clear that there is no room for both
peoples together in this country ... We shall not achieve our goal of
being
an independent people with the Arabs in this small country. The only
solution is a Palestine, at least western Palestine (west of the Jordan
river) without Arabs ... And there is no other way than to transfer the
Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries, to transfer all of them;
not
one village, not one tribe, should be left ... Only after this transfer
will
the country be able to absorb the millions of our own brethren. There
is no
other way out;..." 71/
One of the most notorious cases of the terrorizing of civilian
population
occurred, according to Palestinian and other sources, in April 1948 at
Deir
Yassin, a village near Jerusalem, situated in territory assigned to the
Jewish State by the partition resolution. A former Israeli military
governor
of Jerusalem writes:
"We suffered a reverse of a different nature on April 9 when combined
Etzel
and Stern Gang units mounted a deliberate and unprovoked attack on the
Arab
village of Deir Yassin on the western edge of Jerusalem. There was no
reason
for the attack. It was a quiet village, which had denied entry to the
volunteer Arab units from across the frontier and which had not been
involved in any attacks on Jewish areas. The dissident groups chose it
for
strictly political reasons. It was a deliberate act of terrorism ...
"... Women and children had not been given time enough to evacuate the
village, although warned to do so by loudspeaker, and there were many
of
them among the 254 persons reported by the Arab Higher Committee as
killed.
On 11 May 1949, one day before the signing of the Lausanne protocols,
Israel
was admitted to United Nations membership. In a statement to the
Political
Committee, the Israeli representative declared that his country would
observe the principles of the United Nations Charter, and would
implement
its resolutions. Israel was the only State to have achieved statehood
and
received territory also through an act of the United Nations
The United Nations took up the issue of human rights violations after
the
1967 war and Israel's occupation of the remaining territory in
Palestine and
parts of bordering Arab countries. In August 1967 the General Assembly
endorsed Security Council resolution 237 (1967), calling on Israel to
allow
the return of refugees and to observe international conventions
governing
the treatment of civilians in time of war. 100/ The General Assembly in
1968
reasserted the right of the refugees to return to their homes, and
established a "Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices
Affecting
the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories". 101/
Israel
has refused to allow the Committee entry into the occupied areas but
the
Committee, on the basis of reliable evidence from various sources, has
monitored developments in those areas and regularly submitted reports
to the
General Assembly on alleged Israeli violations of human rights. The
General
Assembly has repeatedly passed resolutions criticizing Israel's actions
in
the occupied territories. The resolution passed in 1977, in terms
reflecting
those passed in preceding years, states that the Assembly:
"Condemns the following Israeli policies and practices:
"a) The annexation of parts of the occupied territories;
"b) The establishment of Israeli settlements therein and the transfer
of an
alien population thereto;
"c) The evacuation, deportation, expulsion, displacement and transfer
of
Arab inhabitants of the occupied territories, and the denial of their
right
of return;
"d) The confiscation and expropriation of Arab property in the
occupied
territories and all other transactions for the acquisition of land
involving
the Israeli authorities, institutions or nationals on the one hand, and
the
inhabitants or institutions of the occupied territories on the other;
"e) The destruction and demolition of Arab houses;
"f) Mass arrests, administrative detention and ill-treatment of the
Arab
population;
"g) The ill-treatment and torture of persons under detention;
"h) The pillaging of archaeological and cultural property;
"i) The interference with religious freedoms and practices as well as
family rights and customs;
"j) The illegal exploitation of the natural wealth, resources and
population of the occupied territories." 102/
Cedric that is the basis for my argument, the Zionist movement, was
intent
on depopulating Palestine of its arab inhabitants, the Palestinan
problem is
cleary a natural result of this actions, any other conclusion would
have
political bias I would imagine, how can the Israeli claim (as they do)
that
there is no room for these people inside its borders, yet actively seek
donations from Jewish Americans on American Cable T.V to transfer East
European Jews to Israel, if you don’t have room, you don’t have room. I
would like to add, that another commentator on your webpage claimed
that
Islam leadership over Jewish holy sites could not be trusted, thus
reason
for Isreali soverignty over Jerusalem, a city in which the above
militray
operation shows the actions and intentions of Isreal, there was no
spirtual
justification for the occupation of Jerusalem at the time, it is as far
asi
can tell a military move. Can you look out for such colonial tactics
please,
Franz Fanon the great writer, pointed out that Colonizers, not only
content
to destroy, the present, delve into the oppresed history, distored and
disfiguring it. When the great Islamic Caph Omar came to Jerulsalem,
he
picked up garbage that littered mount zion, he was the leader of a
beautiful
strong Nation nearly 1 billion strong, and he stopped to pick up
garbage in
jewsish area does that sound like a jealous, jew-hating barbaric arab?,
the
Jews invited him to one another of their holy sites, and he declined,
saying
no lest muslims in the future think they have rights over it, and there
is
contention. Someone once said the truth will always triumph over a lie,
even
if the former is a whisper and the latter a shout. I will leave you
will a
African proverb “ Until the lion learns to speak, tales of hunting will always favour the hunter".Lions are speaking |
| MAD MAC | Sunday, January 07, 2001 - 01:49 am
Islam is not a nation - it is a faith. These are not the same thing. The fact that Islamic adherents follow the same guidance in terms of lifestyle (they don't exactly, but for the sake of argument, we'll assume they do) does not make them a nation. They still have different cultures, different languages, different racial make-ups. |
| common | Sunday, January 07, 2001 - 03:48 am
what is the Ummah? |
| ANON | Sunday, January 07, 2001 - 04:45 am
mad mac----i do not think differences in culture, language and race can prevent people from becoming a nation. i do not know if you know that muslims (as a nation in different nationalities) ruled many countries for centuries.
so, lets see if we can follow your logic----say that if islamic adherents (muslims) who follow what is in the Quran (Allah's Proclamation) does not become a nation------because there happens to be differences of culture, language and race between them-----, then the people in this country (americans) who follow what is in the constitution (dead people's proclamations)-----does not become a nation--------because there happens to be differences of culture, language and race between them, right? |
| MAD MAC | Tuesday, January 09, 2001 - 01:26 am
Islam as A STATE ruled many different nations simultaneously. Differences of culture, language and race really stand at the heart of the definition of nation - although some folks like to dismiss that in favor of a broader definition which really encompasses state vice nation. The nation-state is a state composed of one dominant nation. The multi-ethnic state is one that has no dominant nation. Thus you could have an Islamic STATE that is multi-national - as you have had before (the Ottomans for example).
As for your example, the US really is not a nation, you are correct. Calling it "one nation, under God..." is a mis-nomer. It's really one Country (in this case an amalgamation of States and Nationalities). |
| Ice-Man | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 04:32 pm
I am amaze even to see a decent person will send a letter to julian pond or kwesi Mfume, those men are Buffoon, hypocrite who love to got few Dollars from the Zionist at the expense of their people, if you go back to history of NAACP and how and who created and established that organization was basically Zionist to cover their bad Deed toward Black people in America and use as a propaganda to mislead their children, NAACP cries about Freedom ,justice liberty, So called a civil rights , but willingly to deny the freedom of Palestine most rational people will die to defend what they believe, in their Heart but not NAACP as long as they got few Dollars, my Heart goes to that woman, she is well spoken my Allah Bless her.the violent history of the Zionist in Palestine and their control is well documented but systematically covered up by the Zionist and USA, Allegedly War criminals from Nazi Germany are hunted down and paraded before the World for crimes against humanity, yet atrocities perpetuated by the Zionist"Ariel Sharon" unchecked, these forces are supported by the New World order with all its military and economic might, two world wars were bitterly contested for freedom and justice yet Palestine and Muslims have their freedom and justice denied whether is "FIS" in Algeria the biggest"Mockery so-called democracy" or Kashmir or chechneya have all suffered human right abuses from the Zionist control new world order, where are the voices that condemn these atrocities can anyone forget the 12 year old kid Mohammed being killed in front of his father and the whole World watched and the respond we get from Swine Clinton was" I WONDER IF THERE ANY THING THAT THE FATHER CAN DO " ABSURD
when will justice and freedom be permitted for Muslims?
The reason I reject and I hate to believe Holocaust is what happened the Shatila massacre in Lebanon, and the an Idiot who committed that crime is about to became the prime minister of Zionist state
Later |
| MAD MAC | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 10:49 pm
Ice-Man
The holocaust did happen. Come on over here and I'll show you some interesting historic sites. Remember, the holcaust is what gave Jews great standing in the west. They got the sympathy vote right when they needed it. Israel would never have become the state it is today if the Jews hadn't been pushed out of Europe and made to feel they have to have their own state to protect themselves. From a Jewish perspective the world is out to get them. First persecution at the hands of the Nazis, then persecution at the hands of the Arabs (or cours, from an Arab perspective it's and action-reaction thing. And on this the Arabs are right). For the Arabs and Jews to have real lasting peace, both sides must make a determined effort to understand the psyche of the other. Of course it doesn't help that both sides have religious books that decry the other side as something of lessar value. In this respect the Qur'an has failed the Arabic peoples and the Torah has failed the Jews. |
| common | Friday, January 12, 2001 - 09:30 am
MM
Modern Muslims have many burdens to bear for their actions, and their sins, however crimes against the Jewish nation is not one of them, that is wholly European skelton in the closet, i find it disressing how some feeble minds wish to shape me as a anti semite, due to their pained relations with those of Jewish decsent,to exohcise their ghosts by blaming another people, is quite typical of those of european decent i also find it marcbe that those of Jewsih decesent would seek to purport the victim status, and project images of Nazism on to me and my faith. The oppressed are quite capable of hating their oppressors with out reference to short dead german folk, indeed what appears to be the case is that the oppressors in question are incapable of oppressing without reference to short dead german folk. I hate oppression, and by extention lend this to the oppressor.
I undertand that many shape the pot of clay into the form that they wish, and i congraulate those who wish to do so, however it is the emptyness inside the pot, that people seek to fill. and as long as i inshallah brim with iman ishan and knowledge, you can't make me empty and add what belongs not. The Quran from any perspective fails no one, you fail you understand. |
| Arawello | Friday, January 12, 2001 - 09:58 am
MadMac,
My friend the Quran did not fail anybody.
Palestenians are not all of them Muslaims therefore not following the Quran. If we ahve to say the problem is realted to Religious books , it has to be the Torah ( though I would disagree ) at least the Jews beleave that they have to go back to that place where every they are. And I have to disagree wtih you that they wanted this creation of the state because they were persecuted in eaurope. No, Mya be we can say they gained the support of the eauropeans because of the holocoust. One more thing, why emphasis the holocoust when Bosnia happened teh samething. was not that another holocoust. In central europe????? |
| MAD MAC | Monday, January 15, 2001 - 12:33 am
Common / Arawello
First let's start with the Qur'an and anti-semitism. You guys need to do some more reading or something here on the net. Read Surah 5:41 if you want to get a flavor for what Islam thinks of the Jews. There's lots of other references too.
Arawello, the Palestinians are overwhelmingly Muslim. there are few Christians and I'd be surprised if there were more than a handful of Jews. Certainly more than 90% of the Palestinians are Muslim.
I would not describe what happened in Bosnia as a holocaust. There were certainly many examples of cruel behavior, deliberate population disclocation, etc. But remember the Muslims were fighting - although they were under-resourced. Atrocities were committed on all sides in the Bosnian civil war. Many Serb and Croat families were displaced as well. In Ilidza for example, you won't find very many Serbs anymore even though there were lots of them before and during the war. Certainly the Muslims were persecuted, I'm not saying they weren't. But it was not the intent of the Serbs to exterminate the Muslims, simply to drive them out of certain areas to create Serb areas. The Serbs and Croats both practiced this policy of ethnic cleansing. the Muslims practiced it less because they were less resourced to do so. Remember that all three of these peoples speak the same language, are the same racial make-up, are basically the same people. And most of the Muslims there are nominally such. Although Sarajevo is an overwhelmingly Muslims city, you almost never see a Hijab. In fact the woman are some of the most provocatively dressed I've ever seen anywhere on the planet. Don't believe me, go there sometime, check it out for yourself. There's basically only one town (and it's the size of a postage stamp) that's virulantly Islamic. That's Bocinja Donja. Home to the local Afghan Militant population. There are plenty of Mosques dotting the landscape, but Islam is not the dominant way of life there. I am reminded of a friend of mine who spent all of 1993 in Sarajevo. He was visiting the Commander of the ABiH (Bosnian Muslim Army) V Corps (A General) and after his meal he pulled out a whiskey flask (Vodka and Whisky help kill bacteria in questionable food - no kidding) and took a slug. The General asked "Hey John, can I have some?" And he said "Sir, you're a Muslim!!!" And the General asnwered "John, in Bosnia, the people here are pig eating, whiskey drinking Muslims." True story. |
| common | Monday, January 15, 2001 - 02:02 am
I will check out the sura, but if you think the Quran is anti semetic, it is your twisted mind which imagines so, what is the practical application of the Quran in life the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) Was the messenger of the Quran also anti semetic?, seeing as his sunnah is a example for muslims? was he anti semtic? Grow up Mad Mac
besides, were not the Jews involved in activities against the Nazis, were they not also just under resourced. Was it not the murder of a German diplomat in Paris which caused the night of the long/broken glass?
about the bosnian muslims, a lot of people engage in such activities, whats your point? |
| Arawello | Monday, January 15, 2001 - 08:18 am
Hey man,
my point was that the Palastinians are not fighting because the Quarn told them to do so, but they were living there. It happened to be that as I and the other somalis lived in somalia and will fight againsgt anyone who tries to occupy our territory.
I am againsgt you ides that the quran told them to do so. I said this may be true for the Israelis. who we know beleve that they should all return to their '' holly land'' and where they claim Musa pbuh was born though, this is not so.
Your point of anti-semitasim I have to say it is something you are creating now. And it is Anglo-sexan notion anyway. There was no bad reltionship between the Muslims and the Jews ( which can be described the Arab- Israeli relationship and not so Islam and Juadaesim, well, except Al- aqsa) up untill the creation of the state of israel.
We all know the history that Jews survived and lived under islaims rules without any problem.
About Bosnia, you can named it whatever you called but it is not so much different from what happene to the jews.
What driving me mad now is the fact you are trying to conceal ( may be you think it is true) that the Bosnian muslims were virtually made defencelles maily by the Us Policy. The Embargo. do you not remember in the summer 1995, the day when the men between 17- 80 of a whole villege, walked away from their houses . their weapons were taken by the so-called UN tropps. they walked numbering about 7000. And remeber few days latter only just handfull of them arrived!!! where are the others ????? still on the way HUH?????
This was Europe and is Europe in the 2o/21 centruy.
But pleas do not tell me they were under resourced. they were indeed disabled.
I will check the ayah you mentioned. |
| MAD MAC | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 02:20 am
Arawello
You don't want to get into a debate with me about Bosnia. I lived there for a year. And I didn't see you there. The embargo was not, I say again not, US policy. It was European policy which the US oppossed but did not violate - at least officialy. So let's get our facts straight.
You reference the slaughter of Srebrenica (I was there 6 months ago - when did you visit last???). First of all, the Muslims in Srebrenica were NEVER disarmed by the UN troops. They surrendered because their tactical situation was hopeless. The Dutch Battalion there was woefully equipped to do the job. the Europeans (there were no American forces deployed there - this was during the UNPROFOR days) had been working under the mind set that their presence would guarantee the protection of the "Safe Areas". This was Naive in the extreme. HOWEVER - before we go too far in comdeming the Serbs for attacking Srebrenica, let's remember that there were some armed Muslims who were using the safe area as a base from which to attack Serbs villages which were unprotected behind the lines. Thus the Serb action, while deplorable, was not unprovoked. When the Serbs launched their attack they took some 30 Dutch Peacekeepers (who had no weapons larger than a .50 cal machine gun) hostage. When the Dutch Battalion commander threatened air strikes if the Serbs did not cease their attack, the Serbs responded with a threat to kill the captured peace-keepers if this happened. The next day the Serbs overran Srebrenica, rounded up most of the male population (some fled to the rugged mountains and made their way to Tuzla - a Muslim controlled city) and executed them. Numbers vary - it's between 3,000 and 7,000. While all this sounds horrible, and it is, keep in mind we are talking Bosnia here. As P.J. O'Rourke commented while he was there. The Serbs have just as many grievances as everyone else in Bosnia - which is to say a lot. And they're just as much in the right as everyone else - which is to say they're shits. The reason the Serbs have behaved so horribly in this war is the same reason a dog licks his balls, because they can. So I wouldn't try and use the Bosnia examples as one of the bad west slaughtering the poor Muslims. First of all the Serbs are from the East, not the west. Secondly, the US has supported the Muslims throughout the conflict and post conflict period. Go to Bosnia, talk with the locals, and ask them what they think of the US Army and US government. I guarentee you will get an overwhelmingly favourable response. Ask the Serbs (I was flipped off more in Srebrenica than Wardigle) what they think of us and you will hardly get a warm response.
As for Holocaust, both you and COMMON are exagerating scale and intent - and intent is critical here. The Serbs and Croats did not set out to kill all of the Muslims, they set out to create extensions of Serbia and Croatia by driving Muslim populations out of the areas they claimed. This forceable population relocation, while deplorable, was not intended to destroy as a population group the Bosnian Muslims. That was the intent of the NAZIs. They intended to literally exterminate (read kill) all the Jews. Not relocate, not oppress, KILL. The Jews fought the NAZIs in one place - the Warsaw ghetto. There was no other coordinated resistance ever by the Jews. There were some Russian Jews who were fighting as partisans, but as members of Russian partisan units, not Jewish ones.
Common
You are correct - the Qur'an is not anti-Semitic (indeed the Palestinians are Semites) it is anti-Jewish. But the test of the Qur'an tends to refer to Jews as if they were a people, not a faith. My use of the word Semite was a poor choice. As I said, read the references in the Qur'an. The Jews are given all sorts of negative labels. It's endless. The Qur'an and the Torah fail the Palestinians and the Jews respoectively by indicating that their respective religious groups are superior to the other. The Qur'an goes so far as to specifically indict the Jews. This makes it very easy for someone to justify reprehensible behavior, since it is easy to rationalize the Jews as something of lessar value. |
| common | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 03:06 am
ahhh
but the difference being the Islamic faith is universal, the jewish faith exclusive, it is the jews that inextricably tie their faith, with their identity, not the Quran, indeed the Quran is a message to the jews, inviting them, the former chosen people of Allah (swt)
any references are towards their behaviour rather than their inherent characteristics, which they can change, by embracing Islam, can i embrace judaism? |
| MAD MAC | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 05:11 am
Common
Can I embrace Judaism?? Absolutelty. You can become a Jew no problem. In fact, an American Army Officer did just that, then stole some secrets, flew to Israel and delivered them. He's now being tried for espionage. I have a personal friend who converted to Judaism (for the wrong reasons I think - but tha'ts irrelevant). You can definately convert. Jews are not a race. They are a faith that can be embraced or disgarded. It is misplaced notions of what a Jew is that give substance to these ideas. Think about it. There a Sapahrdic Jews, there are Russian Jews, there are Ethiopian Jews. The Ethiopians aren't Semites so someone was converting somewhere along the line. Only some narrow Jewish sects maintain that Judaism is something you are born in to. And they are generally considered head cases by the main stream Jewish society.
BTW I noticed you didn't address any of the other points.
On a personal note I have a CD I think you would like. The best of Johnny Clegg and Savuka. It's a South African Band. They have a song on it, Third World Child, I think you would like it. they also have a unique, African sound that I think you would appreciate - although it's nothing like Somali music, which I hate. |
| common | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:36 am
MM
Cd sounds interesting.. somali music is sort of an aquired taste,give it some time
hated it growing up, then could take bits in small doses, and now can actually listen to it. Although it probably isn't worth the effort for most, but seeing as you plan to live there, i would try
The "extreme" cases you refer to is othodox judaism, ie: mainstream judiasm, of course i can convert to reformist judiasm, i can go and get all jiggy with a liberal new york rabbi, but it really isn't what they actually believe, the holy Torah isn't having it. the mainstream you refer to is a slighly secularised society, which is kind of hard in a theocracy such as Israel, but most ,manage it. I am not saying i would not be accepted by liberal jews, i probably might find a few, however i am talking about from a religious standpoint, that is like saying the muslims who don't care what the Quran actually says will be happy with you, but from an Islamic perspective you can't do that
About Bosnia, how would i know?, you probably know way more about it than i do, i do know the serbs were evil and slaughtered muslims, thats enough for me. I had heard something to the effect that Bosnian muslims have very different ettique to other muslims, but that would be a assertion in league with my kuwati statement would it not?, which by the way you twisted |
| common | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:37 am
MM
Cd sounds interesting.. somali music is sort of an aquired taste,give it some time
hated it growing up, then could take bits in small doses, and now can actually listen to it. Although it probably isn't worth the effort for most, but seeing as you plan to live there, i would try
The "extreme" cases you refer to is othodox judaism, ie: mainstream judiasm, of course i can convert to reformist judiasm, i can go and get all jiggy with a liberal new york rabbi, but it really isn't what they actually believe, the holy Torah isn't having it. the mainstream you refer to is a slighly secularised society, which is kind of hard in a theocracy such as Israel, but most ,manage it. I am not saying i would not be accepted by liberal jews, i probably might find a few, however i am talking about from a religious standpoint, that is like saying the muslims who don't care what the Quran actually says will be happy with you, but from an Islamic perspective you can't do that
About Bosnia, how would i know?, you probably know way more about it than i do, i do know the serbs were evil and slaughtered muslims, thats enough for me. I had heard something to the effect that Bosnian muslims have very different ettique to other muslims, but that would be a assertion in league with my kuwati statement would it not?, which by the way you twisted |
| common | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:39 am
Oh and those ethopians do claim that they are semetic and decended from Abraham etc etc
so do a lot of somalis calim they are semetic, you should know this |
| common | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:39 am
Oh and those ethopians do claim that they are semetic and decended from Abraham etc etc
so do a lot of somalis claim they are semetic, you should know this |
| Arawello | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:51 am
MM,
of course i was not there and probably will never but to understand an author's point you do not have to know him. I do not need to be there to know what happened there. at least the media covrage on the issue was quite okey to beleave.
and your other point;
Of course the Quarn is not anti-semitic and will never be since we do not rewrite it! iam sure some wicked muslims would like to have the idea like '' the new edition of the Bible '' etc.
Okey, lets us start again; All thase three are same origins and I think same languages. what was the problem?
About the Judaims. What you are saying does not appear in any text books. may be some who are really slick politians would say yeh of course you can convert to jadaems but the raelty no you cannot. |
| MAD MAC | Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 10:20 am
Arawello
Trust me, I was there. I have studied this, walked the actual battlefield, examined the building where most of the Muslims were shot, and been to the mass graves. I was working as a military advisor for LTG Adams, Commander SFOR at the time. My facts are straight here. The Bosnian civil war was just that, a civil war. And the Bosnian Muslims committed their fair share of attrocities, just as the Croats did. There were no good guys in this war. Look what happened to the Serbs in the Krajina. |
