The news item read “4:16 pm, American Ambassador Michele Sison (sp) departed Lebanon for her country.”  Ten minutes later the item disappeared and, as it turned out, the ten minutes was  exactly how long it took for the US Embassy security and press office to inform Beirut media outlets that “the American Ambassador's movements are to be reported at least one hour after they occur ,not one minute.” 

The hasty departure of Ambassador Michele Sisson, according to the US Foreign Relations Committee office, may have been because the Obama administration is preparing for a ‘deep review’ of its 9 months' effort in Lebanon and the region, debriefing key officials arriving from the area to participate. 

Ambassador Sisson will likely give the White House an earful, including a report of what the Embassy Press Office referred to as the spectacle this week of former US friends and assets in the March 14 majority coalition warmly and very publicly embracing at various events marking the end of the 5 month effort to create a government here of those “Iranian surrogates” in Hezbollah.  The Ambassador may also report to the White House that Hezbollah in now the most popular and  respected political party in Lebanon and the main pillar of the new government and that it is about to launch its social welfare initiatives in Parliament. 

The White House appears to know that Hezbollah is here to stay and if a plebiscite was held, polls show that  the Lebanese public would agree that now more than ever the growing National Lebanese Resistance led by Hezbollah is needed as a deterrent to Israeli aggression, given the  recent discovery of a vast Israeli spy network, daily violations of Lebanese sovereignty, as well as the serial threats from all manner of Israeli officials, extremist rabbis, settlers and their supporters in the US Congress who appear to be encouraging Israel to launch its 7^th War against Lebanon. 

The Bush and Obama administrations' former ally, and new Prime Minister Saad Hariri is apparently also pulling back a bit from Washington and seems to be going out of his way this week in stressing this, telling a group of students at Beirut Arab University that “Lebanon will no longer be the playground for regional Conflicts and that there must be no more international heavy handedness from outside powers”.  Some of the students thought he was alluding to the United States. 

At a Hamra Internet Café a chic and sassy Saudi student majoring in business explained, as she examined several rings on her fingers: “Your government has already served Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and soon Palestine and Egypt to Iran on a mezza platter.  Soon, maybe my country! Is your government stupid or just what is the problem?” 

A coup de grace of sorts has been  administered to the Lebanese branch of  the “New Middle East ” project  by former US ‘partner’ Walid Jumblatt  when after telling a visiting American delegation that “the neocons are still in charge in Washington” he announced that Syria, his former sworn enemy, does indeed have legitimate geopolitical interests in Lebanon and that he for one was ready to acknowledge and even support them.   Even Saudia Arabia seems willing to defer to Syria as the Wahabist Kingdom calculates how best to revive Arab nationalism as a bulwark against its nemesis, Shia Iran.  In the background the influence of Egypt, under its long time President Hosni Mubarak, diminishes.   All these fast moving maneuvers and events leave Washington with only Samir Geagea and few others to do its bidding. 

The White House is no doubt already aware that the past three years of US-Israeli projects are in tatters as that Lebanon may indeed have joined the regional era of Resistance.

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Naim Qassim, who will play a key role in enacting social programs in Parliament that Hezbollah is committed to has made clear as he stated yesterday, that  “It’s time to get to work.”

Hezbollah has yielded to some of its political opponents some of its expected Cabinet seats, out of a bloated number of 30 as part of the 15 (March 14 ‘Majority’) 10 (Hezbollah led opposition) and 5 (appointed by President Michel Suleiman) formula.  The reason is to get off to a good start in the newly formed government. 

One Hezbollah official noted in a recent conversation about the makeup of the new government which is one the White House does not favor but can do little about just now:

“Tayyeb! (OK!), this is our (Hezbollah’s) opportunity to show our countrymen and others who we are and what we can do for our country.  I will admit that our Zionist enemies had been somewhat successful in creating a false image of us.  We will now work with all parties and try to implement our legislative program.  You will see us compromise and try to convince all factions to work with us to improve Lebanon.  We do this not for Iran or Syria but because we are Lebanese.  Watch us, criticize us, and condemn us if we fail.  Let’s see what we can achieve with all the political factions. Long after Hezbollah helps return our Palestinian guests to their rightful homes we will be trying to improve our country as part of our government.” 

American policy towards Lebanon is in some ways back to square one.  There are a number of things that the Obama Administration can do to begin to rebuild Lebanese confidence in the Obama administration's good intensions. 

At a recent meeting in West Beirut, a group of students, young and old, gathered at a seminar to discuss the image of America in the Levant.  A US Embassy representative was invited but bowed out at the last minute and advised the group to ‘send us an email and we will look it over.”   So far there has been no reply from the Embassy but below are some of the suggestions from Lebanese University students to the White House, State Department and US Congress, updated on 11/12/09.  

1.     Immediately issue a Press Release explaining whether the rumors are true that President Obama gave Israeli PM Netanyahu a ‘green light’for its threatened 7^th War against Lebanon.  AIPAC has been telling some Congressional Hill staffers that the reports of a  ‘cold meeting’ between the two leaders  last weekend was  "for public consumption’ but that in fact the meeting went swimmingly for Israel and Netanyahu came away with a caution but approval for its plans to ‘finish business’ in Lebanon which the Israeli leader claimed will benefit both countries. 

2.   Support the current General Assembly Draft Resolution sponsored by China and Sudan and expected to garner close to 168 votes and pass, that requires full and fair compensation from Israel to be paid to Lebanon for the July 13 and July 15, 2006 bombings of the Jiyyeh Oil Storage tanks south of Beirut that heavily polluted 150 km of Lebanon’s shoreline.  According to Greenpeace the effects of the release of the 15,000 gallons of heavy oil can take decades to recovery and the final clean up costs may exceed one billion dollars. 

3.     Give Israel not more than 30 days to withdraw from Sheba Farms and ‘Ghajar village as required by UN Security Council Resolutions 1701 and 425, the latter unanimously passed in the Security Council in 1978, demanded complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory and has still not been fully complied with and has been gathering dust for 31 years. 

4. Adequately fund and provide equipment for the cleanup of South Lebanon and the removal of American cluster bombs and land mines.  After three years of effort, 7.9 million square meters remain unclear and with winter approaching again the bomblets become more difficult to find as casualties continue to climb from the current number of 263.  On November 4, 2999 the US did pledge additional funds to the Lebanese Army as part of its “anti-terrorism” program but much more need to be done.  

5. End the political favoritism in US AID projects to Lebanon and other US foreign projects here and make American foreign aid grants on the basis of need and effectiveness in helping Lebanon as a whole rather than according to party affiliation, sect, religion or neighborhood. 

6.     End the bashing of Hezbollah, Syria and Iran by the flow of US officials who float into Lebanon with various  hreats or to announce for the umpteenth time that the US ‘respects the freedom, sovereignty, and independence of Lebanon”, while blatantly interfering in Lebanon’s integral affairs.  This charade has become the butt of Lebanese stand up comedians and undermines US efforts to be taken seriously. 

7.   The US should join the growing "Dialogue paradigm” in the region and work to erase the huge contradictions between American government “sweet songs” as in June 2009 by President Obama in Cairo, and their deeds.  Talk with those most needed for making peace in the region including Syria, Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.  Trying to destroy or punish them by unconvincing slurs makes the US appear rather silly.

8.  Clarify for the Lebanese public any US plans for another airbase and who would have access to it. 

9.  End the evident US efforts at igniting Sunni-Shia clashes not just in Lebanon but in Iraq, Saudia Arabia, Iran and Yemen. 

Hopefully Ambassador Sisson, whose representative missed the meeting at the American University of Beirut, will pass along some of these Lebanese proposals to the President. 

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Lebanon and can be reached at fplamb@gmail.com

Many estranged events happened in the last three months which added confusion to the already vague situation in Palestine, a matter which enforces people concerned about  the Palestinian issue to search for what is the optimal solution to these sticky situations, and to find the reasons why the Palestinians had failed to achieve their goals of reconciliation.

The overall ongoing situation in the Gaza Strip, including the delay of the Goldstone Report, and the failure of the reconciliation dialogue in Cairo, within the previous two months, have led to the vagueness of the speculation of the political situation and made the Palestinian political compromise between the two rivals closer to collapse. Furthermore, the most significant outcome of the bad political situation, within the previous three months, was the enhancing of the political and the security divide in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Firstly, the delay of the Goldstone Report has led to a heated controversy in the Palestinian arena, since the two rivals, Fateh and Hamas, spared no effort to gain semi-victory of the elections by inciting their partisans on their own information. The delay of the report has further widened and solidified the political breakdown and made the reach for the reconciliation closer to fantasy and craziness according to the Palestinian monitors and even for the general public.

Secondly, the call for the presidential and parliamentary elections in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, issued by the President, Mahmoud Abbas on 23 October 2009, has led to an additional splintering of the already political and strategic divide among "the factions to reconcile", where the first agreement signed in Mecca had no tangible actions on the ground after 4 months of holding it, the impending signing of the Egyptian document was projected to present the same dilemma due to the lack of looking up the hidden, creative ways of achieving the reconciliation.

Thirdly, The concern that rankles the people of Gaza is that the impending Palestinian elections should not enhance the fact of life in the Palestinian territories in general and Gaza's situation in particular— Elections may be another "bottleneck" of resolving the key issues of the Palestinian cause as the status quo now is different from the past four-years.

Accordingly, just before the failure of the dialogue in Cairo, the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, declared the next presidential and parliamentary elections in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, saying that if the reconciliation efforts in Cairo succeeded, the elections might be in June of the next year as envisaged in the Egyptian document.

The dialogue doomed to fail; and the idea of the elections became a new resolution by the Palestinian president, who withdrew his candidacy for the next presidential election.

Now, the Hamas government in Gaza and the PA in the West Bank claimed legitimacy and their right to govern but, in my opinion, the truth has many other facets; Hamas considers itself the main governor of the Gaza Strip and has the credit of the Palestinian people to govern, while Fateh claimed that Hamas seized Gaza by force and thus got out of the Palestinian legitimacy.

If we look here on the term "legitimacy”; we can see it’s very relative and difficult to be absolute among the Palestinian factions who have different ideological and political backgrounds, thus: can Hamas, the Palestinian leading power, cooperate with the PA President to achieve the articles of the constitution; if Hamas agreed to resort to the President's declaration of the elections, can Israel and the U.S.A. respect the outcomes of the election? Is Abbas' move tactical or strategic?

In my opinion, the scenarios of the cynical elections in the Palestinian territories will just enhance the geo-political division between the larger West Bank (for the PA government, and the smaller Gaza Strip (for the Hamas government); boost the culturally different halves of the country; two states within the Palestinian state and proclaimed two-state solution with the Israeli Hawkish regime in Israel. The future of Gaza is frightening.

Elections had led to entrenching the already deep political dispute between the two biggest parties in Palestine, and then what was possible while Hamas was not in the government, now became more complicated due to Hamas’s understanding of the strategic depth of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, as it is the spinoff of this organization. Any corruption, lack of governance in the small Palestinian enclave of Gaza, or a bad reputation of the performance of the movement may lead to an overwhelming defeat of these groups in Jordan and Egypt. Thus, Hamas decided to govern, whatever the obstacles and the challenges, and, it is a fact that they had been elected by the people and accordingly, they must adhere to their promise of "Change and Reform".

Hamas has not selected that slogan in its first election randomly, but because of the bad bureaucracy in the PA institutions, the lack of a Palestinian comprehensive national project, and even the absence of a comprehensive military leadership among the Palestinian factions; Hamas strived to change the deeply bureaucratic political system, repair what can be repaired, and then reform to the Best.

All of these aspirations of the Islamist movement have not been achieved because of the international community's strict measures against allowing them to govern and make relations with the international community. Hamas was ignored by the international community: the result was the Gazan people became prisoners, living in the widest open-air jail in the world.

This jail was transformed to a laboratory for the Israeli troops who tested the most destructive weapons on the people of Gaza without restraint of humanity.

If the world doesn't understand the fact of life in the Gaza Strip, and deal with the outcomes of the elections as it will be, the situation will go from bad to worse, and no one can halt the waves of extremism in the Middle East, or the waves of the frustration wrapped on the people of Gaza. Gazans need actions on the ground to make them alive as the people of the world; they can't comprehend a life with no tangible actions. 

Ayman Nijim is an interpreter and strategic researcher working for Pal Think for Strategic Studies, you can contact him via: ayman_trans@hotmail.com

A response to the first entry in Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala's First Word War:
“Logos", plural “Logoi” is Greek , meaning “Word” or “Reason”. In Arabic “Kalimah” means “Word”, Plural “Kalaam” Hence, “’Elmul-Kalam” means “Science of word” which means “Linguistics”. It is also worth mentioning that the “word” is sharper than a mighty sword.

Well, linguistically speaking, the human language is a highly organized system basically composed of three elements functioning independently and inseparably:

The individual sounds which are called “Phones”
The combination of these sounds into meaningful units which is called “Morphs”, and
The combination of these meaningfull units into a larger utterance which is called “Syntax".

So far, the Zionist ugly lyre has had the above three chords, and they keep stroking them, composing their propaganda campaigns for serving their unjust, twisted cause.

Mr. Ayman El-Kayman has cleverly explained the first stage “The combination of individual sounds aka PHONES in his article. He also touched on the subliminal messages involved.

The second stage “The combination of meaningful units aka MORPHS” is abundant in the Zionist propaganda; their choice of certain suggestive “WORDS”, such as: Islamists, the improper usage of words “fundamentalists” and “Madrasa”, the improper usage of the comprehensive word “Arabs” instead of the selective word “Palestinians” (though Palestinians are Arabs), but the point is their suggestion (their hate to the Palestinians). The Palestinians are Arabs. Therefore Arabs are to be hated, too – a twisted logic where the implied quantitive “all” is judged by the implied quantitive “some”, hence logically yielding a wrong conclusion.

The third stage “The combination of meaningful units aka Syntax. Mr. SANTIAGO ALBA RICO cleverly covered this stage. But languages have more features for the Zionist cabals to manipulate such as: Adjectives, adverbs, and tenses.

In my preparation for exposing the perversion of the Zionist rabbis, I came across this piece of news:

“ Muslim' rabbi flees sex scandal
Thursday, 13 January 1994

JERUSALEM (AFP) – A rabbi at the centre of a sex scandal has run off to his native Morocco and converted to Islam.”

Rabbi Shimon Dadon, who in Israel had enticed schoolgirls by giving away exam results, is working in a mosque. A rabbinical court is to decide whether to grant a divorce to his wife, Myriam. Under Jewish law, the husband must agree."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/muslim-rabbi-flees-sex-scandal-1406526.html

For God sake, why use the word “Muslim” in description of the word “rabbi”? How can it be possible that some one is “Muslim” and a “rabbi” in the same time? If he is a Muslim, then he is not a rabbi. And if he is a rabbi, then he Jewish, not Muslim.

In conclusion, what really bothers me is Journalists nowadays are foolish; parrots intentionally mimicking the Jewish propaganda machine, or unintentionally out of ignorance, and sometimes out of fear of getting smeared with anti-Semitism; a dirty card the Zionists always wave in the face of whoever opposes them.

So what is the solution? – We have to fight fire by fire.

SEE: http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/10/02/the-first-word-war-palestine-think-tank-and-tlaxcala-declare-war-against-disinformation/

SEND your contributions to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

by Carlos Latuff

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine said on November 3, 2009 that the Palestinian Authority, and all Palestinian parties, must immediately end any and all illusions about the United States or its president, Barack Obama, and instead reject its "negotiations" based on surrender and rely on the Palestinian people and their resistance, unity and national rights.

Comrade Rayya Amin, of the Information Office of the PFLP, said that it must be abundantly clear that Barack Obama is nothing more than U.S. imperialism in new packaging, saying that the United States is an enemy of the Palestinian people and the Arab people, and all progressive and peoples' forces in the world. Comrade Amin stressed that the policy of the United States had not changed in any way, and was engaged in the same strategic alliance with Zionism and conquest of the Arab world that has always determined its actions. She demanded that the PA and all Palestinian, Arab and progressive forces cast aside any and all illusions about Obama and "change" and instead struggle to confront U.S. imperialism and the occupation.

Comrade Dr. Maher al-Taher, member of the PFLP and leader of its branch in exile, said that the U.S. administration is entirely hostile to the Palestinian people and has put all of its efforts into trying to force us to surrender by calling upon Palestinians to enter into unconditional "negotiations" with the occupier, recognizing none of the national rights of the Palestinian people.

Comrade Taher emphasized that the U.S. call for the resumption of so-called negotiations means that the U.S. wants to provide a Palestinian cover of surrender for the ongoing aggression of the Zionist enemy and its policies of Zionization of Jerusalem, escalation of settlement and land confiscation, and present a false image to the world of a "peace process". He said that the occupation wants a so-called "peace process" on the basis of force and intimidation, and said that there can be no "peace" with this enemy. Furthermore, said Comrade Taher, the only road forward for Palestinians is to continue the resistance, end internal division, and unite Palestinian ranks through the reconstruction of the Palestine Liberation Organization on clear national principles and rejecting the entire project of "political settlement" and "negotiations" under the auspices of the United States.

He emphasized that the U.S. is not an "honest broker," nor "neutral," but is instead a hostile party against Palestinian, Arab and Muslim interests and must be dealt with on that basis. He denounced the Netanyahu strategy of so-called "economic peace," noting that he wants to pay for Palestinian surrender with donor funds while continuing settlements, land confiscation, home demolitions and the imprisonment of thousands of Palestinian political prisoners while denying the Palestinian right to return or ending the occupation, and noted that the U.S. is involved in a direct partnership with Netanyahu in denying Palestinian national rights.

Comrade Jamil Mizher, member of the Central Committee of the PFLP, demanded that the Palestinian Authority end its reliance on the U.S. administration and President Barack Obama, saying that all must instead rely on the Palestinian people and uniting our forces in order to confront the occupation.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera Forum on November 2, 2009, Comrade Mizher described the U.S. position approving of Zionist settlements as "scandalous," and demanded that all forms of direct and indirect negotiations with the occupation be immediately ended. He said that all Palestinian and Arab illusions about Obama must be discarded immediately, and that anyone who claims to speak on behalf of the Palestinian people must instead rely on Palestinian national rights and requirements. Furthermore, he called for an end to official Arab silence and complicity with the U.S./Israeli attacks on Palestinian rights, emphasizing the need for popular Arab pressure to support Palestinian resistance.

Comrade Abu Ahmad Fouad, member of the Political Bureau of the PFLP, reacted to the U.S. Congress' official denunciation of the Goldstone Report on war crimes in Gaza on November 3, 2009 by denouncing the Congressional resolution and affirming that this only makes yet more clear that there should be absolutely no illusions about the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama. Comrade Fouad said that this once again reaffirms that there is no change whatsoever in U.S. policy toward the Arab-Zionist conflict, or its policy that supports the Zionist entity and all of its crimes and massacres against the Palestinian people.

Comrade Fouad said that the congressional resolution, House Resolution 867, comes on the heels of the announcement of Obama's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, a few days ago that the fascist Zionist regime of Netanyahu was making "unprecedented concessions," stating the US' support for its settlement and land confiscation program, as well as the enemy's actions in Jerusalem and at Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Comrade Fouad denounced the warm reception Clinton met in Arab capitals while she affirmed the U.S. support for unlimited Zionist expansionism and attacks on the Palestinian people's rights, and stressed that these positions "are and always have been the real position of the Obama administration, and any postures to the contrary are nothing more than smokescreens to mislead Arabs and Palestinians."

He said further that the primary objective of Clinton's visit was to support Israel while promoting deceit about "peace" and "negotiations", but made it clear that the U.S. position is fully aligned with the Zionist policy of aggression, colonization and Zionization before the eyes and ears of the world.

Comrade Fouad commented also on recent joint military exercises between the U.S. and Israel, noting that the U.S. war machine is a full partner in Israeli state terror, recalling the comments of the commander of the U.S. naval ship, the USS Higgins, that the "defense" of Haifa is the same as the "defense" of San Diego, California.

source: http://www.uruknet.de/?p=59730

Futility Much Anticipated With Israel's Occupation

In a measure that has already vexed the internal Palestinian political arena, Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmud Abbas has called for "presidential and legislative elections" to be held in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank, East Al-Quds and the Gaza Strip on January 24, 2010.

The decision is expected to widen and deepen the  state of contention between Fatah and Hamas, the two largest political groups in occupied Palestine.

Fatah, which have been in control of the PA security agencies connived with Western powers and also Israel against Hamas after the Muslim liberation group won the 2006 elections.

This prompted Hamas to oust Fatah militias from the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2007.

The cold-bloodedness between the two sides has evolved into a kind of unprecedented enmity as all Arab, especially since Egyptian efforts to reconcile the two groups, have so far failed.

It is not exactly clear what prompted Abbas to embark on this feat now, especially with reconciliation efforts going nowhere and with the current Israeli government of Benyamin Netanyahu refusing to freeze Jewish settlement expansion despite constant American demands.

Hamas which controls the Gaza Strip, has castigated the decision to hold elections without consultation or coordination with Hamas, as a "grave blunder that would have serious repercussions on the Palestinian national cause."

For his part, Abbas sought to defend his decision, arguing that the elections were a "legal, national and constitutional imperative."

To this, Hamas retorted that it is futile to speak  of constitutional imperatives when Israel controls every street and corner in the West Bank, and when Abbas himself, as the head of the Palestinian Authority, cannot even move from his office in Ramallah to the next street without getting Israel's consent beforehand.

Palestinians, Hamas argued, must not get themselves accustomed to the "normality" of living under the Israeli military occupation.

Objective Facts

In a certain sense, Hamas is correct. The West Bank, which will be the main theatre of the scheduled elections, is still tightly controlled by the Israeli occupation army. 

Indeed, every Palestinian town where the PA enjoys nominal and symbolic "authority" is actually controlled and by the Israeli army, either directly or in collaboration with American-trained Palestinian security forces.

This means that Israel, not the PA, has the final say in all matters pertaining to elections. If Israel says "No", Abbas obviously cannot do much. He will probably succumb to the Israeli decision, and perhaps complain to Israel's guardian-ally, the United States.

Hence, it is probably safe to say that Israel will not allow the organization of real, fair and transparent elections in the West Bank and East Al-Quds if the Jewish state does not receive an "appropriate price" from the weak and vulnerable PA government.

In 2006, when Israel felt that Hamas was poised to win Palestinian legislative elections, it unceremoniously rounded up hundreds of pro-Hamas candidates for PA parliament and local (municipal) councils.

In the West Bank, nearly all elected Muslim MPs were arrested and sentenced to lengthy periods of imprisonment ranging from 32 months to 48 months. Their only "crime" was their participation in elections under the umbrella of a "terrorist organization".

On October 26, 24 MPs, including formers ministers, such Sheikh Nayef Rajoub, are still languishing in Israeli dungeons on no ground other than the fact that they earned the trust of their people in a fair election that was okayed by Israel and the United States and meticulously observed by observers from around the world.

This means that there is no guarantee whatsoever that Israel will not resort to the same draconian measures again. If so, one would really wonder if it is wise to hold elections under such conditions.

Police State Without a State 

To be sure, Israel is not the only obstacle impeding the organization of fair and truly democratic elections. The PA itself is very much a police state without a state. A police state because there is a nearly total absence of the rule of law in the West Bank as human rights and civil liberties are routinely and constantly violated.

 And "without a state" because the PA has no sovereignty of its own and is thoroughly subservient to Israel's whims.

Needless to say, an atmosphere of fear now prevailing throughout the West Bank inhibits organizing truly democratic elections.

People suspected of holding "non-conformist" views, such as sympathizing with Hamas, will be dragged to jails and interrogation dungeons where they are often beaten, humiliated and even tortured. 

At least 10 pro-Hamas sympathizers have been tortured to death at the hands of PA interrogators since 2007.

In addition, thousands of people have been detained and hundreds are still languishing in PA jails without charge or trial.

The police state atmosphere is so rampant in the West Bank today that a petty act like hoisting a green Islamic flag bearing Islam's article of faith (I bear witness that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammed is His messenger) is enough to make one land in a PA interrogation center.

Hence, it is only logical to question the plausibility, let alone wisdom of holding elections under such circumstances.

This is not to say that "elections" cannot be organized at all. They can, but it is highly likely that they would be seriously rigged in daylight, although this would not prevent the PA's Western donors and bankrollers , such the United States and the United Kingdom, from hailing the elections as "democratic and honest".

Hard Questions

The PA leadership claims that it will respect the outcome of the elections, regardless of which party wins the polls. However, any serious observer of the Palestinian arena can hardly take this claim for granted.

Let us suppose for the sake of argument that Hamas would win the elections, even by a narrow margin. Would Fatah then cede power to the victorious party?  Would the United States and Britain and Israel's Western allies come to terms with the results? Would Israel recognize Hamas as the true representative of the Palestinian people? Would the American-trained PA security forces agree to be answerable to the new government?

Obviously, the answer for all these crucial questions is absolutely "No".
It is amply clear that Abbas is not intending to hold elections for the elections' sake.

His ultimate goal is to avenge Fatah's defeat in Gaza more than two years ago, as well as to outmaneuver Hamas into a serious  political predicament.

Ultimately, Abbas wants to get rid of Hamas as a key political player at the Palestinian arena in order to be able to give Israel all or most of the concessions it is now demanding without  facing any serious Palestinian opposition.

Abbas and his aides did try to achieve this ominous goal, namely to decapitate Hamas in 2007, in concert with US intelligence through such people as Elliot Abrams and Keith Dayton.

However, Hamas managed to outsmart them when its "Executive Force" defeated and ousted Fatah's militias from the entire Gaza Strip.

Moreover, Fatah and Hamas differ sharply on the entire rationale behind the elections. Hamas views the elections as part of an overall program for resistance that would eventually enable the Palestinian people to wrest freedom from the Israeli occupation.

On the other hand, Fatah views the election as an opportunity to "settle scores with Hamas" and to willy-nilly re-impose the group's erstwhile hegemony over Palestinian lives, using a variety of stick-and-carrot tactics.

Fatah is bent on remaining in "power", a term which in the Palestinian context is devoid of any real meaning since the PA has no real power and only functions as a submissive sub-contractor for the Israeli occupation.

In light, there is no doubt that holding elections in the West Bank  under the present circumstances would seriously complicate and exacerbate the internal Palestinian crisis and might lead to an irreversible divorce between Gaza and the West Bank.

Certainly, this is not what most Palestinians want.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1256034022358&pagename=Zone-English-Muslim_Affairs%2FMAELayout

Yes, in this age and time, a country still remains oppressed by another, worse still, they are both African countries. Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic (the people are known as Saharawi) is a former colony of the Spanish protectorate which is rich in mineral resources like phosphate mineral rock, it also has some of the best fishing grounds in the world, and its off-shore oil resources are currently being explored.

When Spain pulled out of the colony in 1975, it didn’t finish the decolonisation process and Morocco as its neighbour quickly invaded and took over. Mauritania also seized part of the land but soon returned it to the Saharawi and made peace with the Polisario Front, the political movement that continued to fight against Morocco.

Africa’s Last Colony: Spain’s Error, Morocco’s Sin aptly describes the situation and dire circumstances under which the Saharawi live. Water poisoning, torture, forced disappearances and other inhumane situations are some of the conditions under which the Saharawi live.

The book relays the experience of the author, Ike Abonyi who visited the country; Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic. In his foreword, he laments that the story of the country as being an emotional one which has since been ignored by the rest of the world.
The book is divided into three parts with an easy to read and understandable style.  Its full title is apt; Africa’s Last Colony: Spain’s Error, Morocco’s Sin; An African Journalist’s Diary On Western Sahara.

The foreword was written by Prof. Nuhu Yaqub, the immediate past Vice Chancellor of the University of Abuja who described it as a timely addition to literature on Africa’s decolonization process. Yaqub also agrees that many Africans even enlightened ones are ignorant of a country called Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic, not to mention its struggle for independence from Morocco.

His foreword decries the hypocrisy of some of the Western countries who claim to uphold human rights; (France, Germany and Spain) for turning a blind eye to Morocco’s flagrant abuse of human rights. He adds that it is Nigeria’s duty to the African continent to assist Western Sahara secure its independence.

The first part of the book collates the history of Western Sahara, its history with Spain, Spain’s pullout, and Morocco/Mauritania invasion of the country. It also explains how Mauritania returned the land it had seized while Morocco stubbornly held on to its seized part.

Abonyi and other analysts blame Spain for not finishing the decolonisation process i.e., handing over to the Polisario Front, a political group which had been formed in 1973 to fight Spanish colonial rule.

Despite the 1975 ruling of the International Court of Justice that Western Sahara was a country on its own at the time of its colonisation by Spain, its sovereignty still belonged to its people, while Morocco refused to leave the occupied land and the war with the Polisario Front continued. In 1992, the United Nations brokered a cease-fire and passed referendum on self-determination of the Saharawi people but Morocco refused to allow it.

Over 150,000 Saharawi are internally displaced refugees living on a daily ration provided by the United Nations Food Programme while many are hounded into detention without trials or forced into exile.

In the second part, Abonyi narrates his personal experience on the trip to the country; how as a presidential guest, his bed was a six-inch mattress usually used in boarding schools in Nigeria. According to him, the camp has enjoyed some peace in the last 17 years, but most young Saharawi are disillusioned especially since Morocco simply exploits the resources of the country for itself alone, while ignoring the needs of the Saharawi.

The narration by Abonyi would elicit sympathy from every reader; he narrates how young Saharawi have lost their limbs, and in some cases their lives, with explosion of the mines, which Morocco has placed at the 2500km long wall erected on occupied Western Sahara.

He also narrates gory details of about 140 inmates of the Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Mines and War located at the headquarters of administrative headquarters of the Saharawi camp.

The third part of Africa’s Last Colony is a collection of interviews with some dignitaries of Saharawi Government. In the interview, President Mohammed Abdulaziz praised Nigeria’s attitude towards other African nations, and its leadership role in the African continent. Other dignitaries who spoke to Abonyi include Mohamed Salem, the Commander of the Saharawi Military School, and Mohammed Yeslem Beisat, who is the Minister of African Affairs.

The author raises some very important questions; why did Spain not complete the decolonisation process by handing over to the Polisario Front? Why is the commonness of religion, language and geography not helping solve the problem between the two nations? Who manufactures and provides the weapons being used by the Moroccans to unleash terror on the Saharawi?  Which other countries are benefitting from Morocco’s exploitation of the Saharawi? What is the role of France, as the former colonial master of Morocco, in the whole situation?

Some other questions begging for answers are; why is the rest of the Arab world adopting an indifferent approach to the oppression of their ‘brothers’? How much pressure are the African Union and other regional organisations applying to Morocco especially as Western Sahara is also being recognised as a sovereign state.

Africa’s Last Colony brings to fore a true but pitiable situation that, while other people have moved on to battling internal problems such as ethnicity, nepotism and so on, an African nation is being deprived of self-rule by another African nation. The gruesomeness of the situation is that soldiers readily torture and kill, without a war situation in Saharawi, regardless of age or gender.

http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/features/arts/2009/oct/27/arts-27-10-2009-002.html

- The ramification of the Goldtone report and growing calls not only to hold Israeli leaders accountable for specific acts that amount to war cries and crimes against humanity (e.g. in Gaza) but to clearly identify Israel as the racist, colonial state at its core (from which emanates all these atrocities tat include ethnic cleansing).

- The intensified Israeli assault on the AlAqsa compound and the whole of the Holy City of AlQuds/Jerusalem in a final push to Judaicize the city and erase Arab Christian and Muslim heritage.  Home demolitions, denial of basic rights of residence, denial of rights of worship and movement, and outright military assaults on the "city of peace" belie a culture of impunity and disregard for International law that has been allowed to grow.  Leaders of Western, Arab, and Islamic world meanwhile oscillate between outright facilitation of the atrocities to collaboration to indifference (and I am not sure those are distinct or meaningful categories).  Many of us began to think that should Israel destroy the holy sites and build a Jewish temple in its place, we would see merely a few more declarations and statements. [Stand-up for Jerusalem is new website to help families being ethnically cleansed http://www.standupforjerusalem.org/ ]

- Self-created weaknesses. The continued split between Gaza and the West Bank with two "authorities" in essence as if two wings of the prison are being ruled by separate prison factions while the jailer is happy watching the prisoners waste time cursing each other.  I looked into this and read and interviewed many people.  My thought is that it is essential to speak the truth regardless of which prison section we are in.  I noted that both leaderships stated things that are patently untrue about the reality of what transpired over the past three years.  But also both ignored the fact that this situation is directly related to the original and huge mistake of signing Oslo and going down the path that led to an "authority" whose job it is to control the local population while the occupation remains.  It is far better to simply state NOW that Oslo was supposed to be an interim 5 year arrangement, it is now 16 and it is time to declare it dead.  Let us not bicker about "elections" in the West Bank and Gaza and instead make an agreement to dissolve those authorities and implement the agreement already signed by all factions on the revival/reactivation of the PLO. If we want to have more courage, these factions would take a political initiative like supporting the one state solution.  We will explore these issues in the Arabic newsletter sent to those who indicated interest/wanted to be subscribed.  

ACTION 1: Join the Gaza Freedom March http://www.gazafreedommarch.org
 
ACTION 2: Petition to create special tribunal for Israeli war crimes (33,300n already signed)
http://www.petitiononline.com/EAFORD09/petition.html

ACTION 3: Join PACBI Listserve to stay abreast of academic and cultural boycott issues
http://www.pacbi.org/mailinglist.php

ACTION 4: Campaign to free Palestinian prisoners held in Egyptian jails, at least one of whom was clearly tortured to death (Arabic)
http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EE154C1C-BE12-4FD6-AEA3-8D757675B2B7.htm  

Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHa-CzNCF3c

She also eloquently speaks about the people in Gaza, how they are trying to make a living for their families as the Israeli Occupation Forces shoot to kill the farmers and fishermen, long after Operation Cast Lead was supposedly over.

Listen to her speech, see the images from the people who were there recording Israel's use of white phosophorus bombs and other deadly weapons that Israel literally threw at a civilian populations. Families have been torn apart, 29 members of one family murdered in their home as they held a white flag of surrender.

As Ewas says, "Israel's objective is to rid Palestine of Palestinians: drip by drip, body by body, person by person, village by village."

She as well as over a dozen other speakers are available to speak to your groups.

You can contact: http://www.freegaza.org/join-in/speaker-bureau and ask for someone to come and talk about the voyages of Free Gaza movement, the work in Gaza and witnessing the attempt by Israel to destroy a civilian population aided by American money and American weapons.

In solidarity & struggle,
FREE GAZA MOVEMENT
http://www.FreeGaza.org

Reclaiming words:  identity and thought, We are not Israeli Arabs, we are Palestinians 

WRITTEN BY KHALIL NEKHLEH

The indigenous remnants of the Palestinian people in Israel after the ethnic cleansing of 1947/1948 should be referred to as The Palestinians in Israel, or the Palestinian Minority in Israel.  They should not be labeled as “Israeli Arabs”, or “48 Arabs”.

Personally, I am the remnant of my indigenous Palestinian people who lived in Palestine (nearly 900,000), and who were “ethnically cleansed” in preparation for the establishment of the apartheid Jewish state of Israel in 1947/1948.  Only 160,000 of us remained in what became known as “Israel”. I was, and am, a Palestinian, who fortunately was able to stay on the land of historical Palestine, i.e., Palestine under the British Mandate, and who became a member of a growing and vibrant minority of nearly 1.3 million Palestinians, who is living now in the Israeli apartheid state.  The label “Israeli Arabs” was coined and imposed on us by our enemies, namely, the Israeli racist apartheid state. Many Arab states chose to disregard our existence, or were totally ignorant of our status, as well as the Western World who supported Zionism, and facilitated and sanctioned the creation of the Israeli racist apartheid state, and who persists in justifying its existence.  We were Palestinians before the ethnic cleansing of 1947/1948 and we continue to be Palestinians since, and are proud of it.  Our identity and collective destiny is connected to the rest of the Palestinian people in the Palestinian areas occupied by Israel in 1967 and the rest of the dispersed Palestinians in a state of refuge. We are part of nearly 11 million Palestinians all over the world who aspire for freedom and justice. 

As our “solidarity debt”, we expect you to address us as “The Palestinians in Israel”.  We must purge our and your lexicon of the label of “Israeli Arabs”, the concept of our occupiers and oppressors, that seeks to mould our reality in their own image. 

Khalil Nakhleh, Ph.D.
Independent Researcher and Writer
Ramallah, Palestine/Israel
(Struggling to Transform Our Homeland) 

The First Word War is an initiative of Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala. We welcome our readers to submit entries for publication, translation and dissemination. Send them to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

The First Word War

In the name of "Self-defense"
WRITTEN BY REALISTIC BIRD

In the name of "self-defense" they massacred, in the name of "self-defense" they committed ethnic cleansing, and in the name of "self-defense" they stole land. 

The Israelis have hidden behind the concept of self-defense for decades by abusing the word to their advantage. The word self-defense gives off the connotation that the one acting it is the victim under attack from a vicious aggressor.

Have you ever heard the Israelis describing any of their wars or offensives other than in that context? It even led them to call their armed forces, [Israeli] Defense Forces. The duplicity of the situation arises from the nature of the Zionist entity, a colonizing, invading, occupying and racist entity founded on the death and expulsion of the Palestinians. How is it possible for such an entity who was the initiator of aggression to claim its actions are done in self-defense? The one who attacks, who destroys 400 villages, massacres scores of the inhabitants, and occupies the lands of Palestine over more than six decades can't be a victim thus has no right to self-defense.

An occupation is by its very nature a brutal existence and because of this international law admits that any people under it have the right to resist it in all means possible. Yet, looking at the hasbara that the Israelis and their allies spread through the media one thinks that the Israelis are the ones under occupation and not the Palestinians. The Palestinians are always shown as the terrorists, the ones who are attacking but the truth is international and human law gave them the right to fight back aggressors. The Palestinians are the ones under occupation, does anyone deny that? If so how is it possible that the Israelis claim "self-defense" to excuse their crimes when there is an undeniable right to resist them?

In a lopsided world where the meaning of words are taken out of context and contradict the truth and common sense Israelis are allowed to commit their horrendous acts with no one to hold them accountable. 

Visit Realistic Bird’s site at: www.realisticbird.wordpress.com.

The First Word War is an initiative of Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala. We welcome our readers to submit entries for publication, translation and dissemination. Send them to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

La Prima Guerra Della Parola – Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala dichiarano la guerra contro la disinformazione

Dare di nuovo un senso alle parole: identità e pensiero, Non siamo “Arabi Israeliani”, ma Palestinesi 

WRITTEN BY KHALIL NAKHLEH
Tradotto da Mary Rizzo

La gente, quel che rimane del popolo indigeno palestinese in Israele dopo la pulizia etnica di 1947/1948 dovrebbe essere chiamata solamente con il nome di I Palestinesi in Israele, oppure La Minoranza Palestinese in Israele.  A queste persone non dovrebbero essere addossate l’etichetta “Arabi Israeliani” oppure “Gli Arabi del ‘48”.

Per quanto mi riguarda, sono un pezzo del mio popolo indigeno palestinese che visse nella Palestina (quasi 900,000 persone), che subì la “pulizia etnica” negli anni 1947/1948, per preparare la fondazione di uno stato ebraico basato sull’apartheid, quello stato chiamato Israele. Solamente 160,000 di noi sono rimasti in quel territorio che è diventato “Israele”. Io ero, e sono, un palestinese, che, fortunatamente è potuto rimanere sulla terra della Palestina storica, vale a dire, la Palestina sotto il mandato britannico, e che è diventato membro di una minoranza florida e in crescita che conta quasi 1,3 milioni di palestinesi. Ma ora vivono nello stato d’apartheid che tutto il mondo conosce con il nome d’Israele. L’etichetta “Arabi Israeliani” è stato inventato e c’è stato imposto dai nostri nemici, lo stato razzista d’Israele. Molti stati arabi hanno scelto di non tenere conto della nostra esistenza, oppure sono stati completamenti ignari della nostra situazione, ed il Mondo Occidentale che ha sostenuto il Sionismo, quello che ha facilitato e promosso la creazione dello stato razzista, che applica l’apartheid, quello d’Israele, persiste nella giustificazione della sua esistenza. Noi siamo stati palestinesi prima della pulizia etnica del 1947/1948, e noi continuiamo ad essere palestinesi, e ne siamo ben orgogliosi di ciò. La nostra identità ed il nostro destino collettivo è connesso a tutto il resto del popolo palestinese nelle zone occupate dall’Israele nel 1967 e con il resto dei palestinesi dispersi con lo status di profughi. Noi siamo una parte dei quasi 11 milioni di palestinesi diffusi in tutto il mondo che aspirano alla libertà e alla giustizia.

Come un gesto di dimostrazione della vostra solidarietà, noi gradiremo che ci chiamaste solo “I Palestinesi in Israele”. Dobbiamo eliminare dal nostro e dal vostro lessico l’etichetta di “Arabi Israeliani”, perché è solo un concetto di quelli che ci tengono sotto l’occupazione, i nostri oppressori, in un tentativo di trasformare la nostra realtà nella loro stessa immagine. 

Khalil Nakhleh, Ph.D.
Ricercatore e Scrittore indipendente
Ramallah, Palestina/Israele
(Lottando per la Trasformazione della Nostra Patria)

La Prima Guerra Della Parola è un'iniziativa di Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala. I nostri lettori possono partecipare, mandando i loro testi a contact@palestinethinktank.com oppure tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

La Prima Guerra Della Parola – Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala dichiarano la guerra contro la disinformazione

Nel nome della “difesa”

SCRITTO DA REALISTIC BIRD

Tradotto da Mary Rizzo 

Nel nome della “auto-difesa” hanno massacrato. Nel nome della “auto-difesa” hanno adoperato la pulizia etnica. Nel nome della “auto-difesa” hanno rubato la terra. 

Gli israeliani si sono nascosti dietro il concetto dell’auto-difesa per decine di anni, abusando di questa parola per il proprio vantaggio. La parola stessa, “auto-difesa”, suggerisce l’idea che quello che agisce lo fa perché è sotto attacco di un aggressore violento e crudele. 

Avete mai sentito gli israeliani descrivere una qualsiasi delle loro guerre (oppure offensive) in una maniera diversa da questo particolare modo? Infatti, questo modo di ragionare gli ha indotti a chiamare le loro forze armate le Forze di Difesa Israeliani (IDF, Israeli Defense Forces in inglese). Il paradosso della situazione nasce dalla natura dell’entità sionista, un entità colonialista, razzista e che adopera l’occupazione di terre altrui, attraverso la morte e l’espulsione forzata dei palestinesi. Com’è possibile per un tale entità che è stato l’artefice delle aggressioni di dichiarare che le sue azioni sono compiute solo per l’auto-difesa? Quello che attacca, che distrugge 400 villaggi, massacrando un gran numero di abitanti, che occupa le terre della Palestina per più di sessant’anni, non può essere una vittima, e quindi, non ha il diritto alla loro presunta “auto-difesa”. 

Vivere sotto un’occupazione, per sua natura, è un’esistenza disumana, e per questo motivo, il diritto internazionale ammette che ogni popolo che vive sotto occupazione ha il diritto a resistere contro l’occupazione stessa con ogni mezzo. Però, sotto l’influenza pesante della hasbara israeliano (ndt: propaganda ufficiale pro-israeliana), che gli israeliani ed i loro alleati diffondono attraverso i mass media, si ha l’impressione che sono invece gli israeliani che vivono sotto l’occupazione e non i palestinesi. I palestinesi sono rappresentati sempre e solamente come “terroristi”, quelli che stanno attaccando gli inermi, ma la verità non ha frontiere, è la legge che gli umani hanno scritto che gli da il diritto di combattere contro gli aggressori. I palestinesi sono quelli che vivono sotto l’occupazione, ci sono delle persone che potrebbero negare questo fatto? Dunque, com’è possibile che l’affermazione israeliana della “auto-difesa” è usata per giustificare i loro crimini quando già esiste il diritto internazionale inderogabile di resistere contro l’occupatore? 

In un mondo sbilanciato dove il significato delle parole manca, e le parole stesse sono usato senza il giusto contesto, contraddicendo la verità stessa, nonché il buonsenso, gli israeliani hanno il permesso di commettere i loro atti orrendi, senza che nessuno gli renda responsabili per le loro azioni. 

Visitate il sito di Realistic Bird (www.realisticbird.wordpress.com). 

La Prima Guerra Della Parola è un'iniziativa di Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala. I nostri lettori possono partecipare, mandando i loro testi a contact@palestinethinktank.com oppure tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

In many parts of the West, certain political parties or movements are treated as if they come from the Moon or are alien to any body politic. Their existence among the people is always scrutinised as negative, transitory and something created in a boardroom or a backroom, imposed upon an unsophisticated public that is unable to differentiate a true political programme from empty and simplistic rhetoric. These parties or movements are depicted as if they only address the margins of society who are disenfranchised from any “normal” democratic bodies, and thus, are ramshackle bands that represent a minority constituency. Given their oppositional nature to pre-existing parties, they are outfitted with the label that will serve to keep them isolated from the structures that are already in operation. All of this is to destroy the party or movement by propaganda work rather than analysis of reality.

An entire mythology has been built around the Palestinian resistance movement (which morphed into a party) Hamas. This construct has actually taken on more legitimacy as a factual interpretation of Hamas than the facts themselves. In most of the Western media, no matter if it is on the right or the left, and in some of the “moderate” media in Arab countries, the very name of the party is coupled with terms such as “fundamentalist”, “radical” or “terrorist”. Clearly, this serves to create a fear trigger that will remove the word from being critically and honestly evaluated. The listener will immediately identify Hamas with a negative connotation and is removed from responsibility for understanding that this is a manipulation of reality. The listener is expected to accept the claims that Hamas is “anti-democratic” and “fanatical”. It is child’s play to then convince the listener that Hamas is Bad, that it is the Enemy of all We represent (in our own eyes, tolerance, democracy, Goodness itself). It is possible to then extend that reading to the belief that action must be taken against them, that they are a “cancer that must be gotten rid of”, as quoted by the institutional peacenik, Noa. How does one eradicate a cancer, once it has been diagnosed? By extirpation or bombardment. With cancer treatment, one “bombards” even the healthy parts of the body with toxic agents, waiting to see if after the battle there were enough healthy parts remaining to allow the organism to continue to exist. Once you have set into the minds of millions of people the idea that destruction is good, because the enemy is just so damaging and evil if allowed to exist, the risk of bringing the entire organism to its grave by weakening it dramatically is taken as a viable risk to run. This is a way to make them justify actions that their own eyes don’t see as therapeutic, but are pure horror and evil.

How did it work that the world was so fooled and allowed Israel to destroy Gaza to “get rid of Hamas”? It was quite simple, and it’s always the same answer: Israel and its allies keep people disinformed. Those who actually will go slightly below the screaming headlines of the newspapers might find out a few facts buried that that will contradict the spin, but not that many people will go that far, given that they are exposed to something with an element of truth buried deep within. If that were not problematic enough, even the “progressives” have done meritorious services to rendering Hamas untouchable. They might accept them as a “resistance movement” but they won’t allow their personal ideological bias to see Hamas as a progressive force for their own people’s advancement. This may be out of conviction, convenience or even lack of research or a blindspot that does not allow variations on the theme of the class struggle, where everything is “international” and the same type of rules and ideals should be considered applicable and necessary for all, going so far in some cases to “import democracy” under various more or less aggressive forms.

These people, many of whom are armed with good intentions, have chewed, swallowed, and are spitting back quite a few of the outright lies and distortions that are part of the mythology created by opponents of Hamas, created in Israel and the West, primarily.

What are the components of that mythology?
1) Hamas was created by the Israeli Mossad.
2) Hamas represents a marginal portion of the Palestinians.
3) Hamas turned democratic enough just to be able to obtain some legitimacy to later take over and turn the Palestinian Territories into an Islamic State.
4) Their victory in the polls was nothing more than a protest vote against the corruption of Fatah.
5) Hamas is comprised of a bunch of illiterates and their electors are sucked in by their own ignorance.
6) Hamas is a fundamentalist group and therefore inflexible and incapable of any modification or evolution. The oft cited Charter is used against them to stress that they are simply a radical, destructive group poised for Holy War.
7) Hamas does not seek any kind of compromise with other Palestinian political parties or factions, and are therefore the divisionary element that prohibits of the unity of the people.
8 ) Hamas operates to indoctrinate their people with hate propaganda in order to utilise them as cannon fodder.
9) Hamas is a terrorist group that exists only thanks to financing by “fundamentalist regimes”.

That Hamas is merely a resistance movement has been thoroughly disproved by the elections, but this seems to be the safe place that activists can cluster in order to allow themselves to be able to tolerate Hamas, while wishing for their quick demise. They are not viewed then as having a true heritage as a political party that can be compared to those of “democratic nations” of the “international community”, and thus, analysis of them can remain at an elementary level, lending itself to hasty generalisations.

I ask my readers to kindly forgive all the inverted quotation marks, but these words do become ironic and empty of true meaning when they are applied to the objects indicated by the spin doctors, whose task it is to do the bidding of the hegemonic powers. How can a minority of a handful of nations that always pits itself against the will of the remainder of the world community in the UN be considered as the “international community”? It’s a boy’s club that excludes practically everyone. How can a country that puts in office the candidate who obtains the lesser amount of votes be called a “democracy”? It is when we start to question our own foundations that we can detect that there is a lot of convenience in presenting any opposition as being an enemy and outside of paradigms that we consider to be core to our expectations of how to establish a just and equitable world.

It’s time to debunk a few of these myths with facts.

1) Hamas was not created by Mossad. Although Israel does like to claim credit for many things, this one is not their doing. Political Islam in Palestine has had a presence since the early 40s in Mandate Palestine, and Hamas was born as part of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan), with many of its early leaders formally affiliated. It was the experience of refugeehood that turned Hamas into a more autonomous element with a particular nationalist basis to it, a natural result of the urgent and real human situation of displacement and loss of their cultural and national identity.

There were close relations of this group with the Egyptian base, and the first offices of the Ikhwan in Palestine were created in Gaza in 1945, led by a member of one of the most important families of the zone, Sheykh Zafer al Shawwa. During the first Arab-Israeli war, Islamist volunteers reinforced the ranks, coming primarily from Jordan and Syria, and this support showed the refugees that the Ikhwan had the courage to defend itself, even during the “Israeli War of Independence”. The growing number of refugees gave a stronger identity and sense of purpose to the Islamist movement in Palestine. Therefore, in the civil society and in the population in general, a motivation from any other source was not required to be able to pledge: “I promise to be a good Muslim in defending Islam and the lost land of Palestine. I promise to be a good example for the community and for others.” These were the words spoken by those who swore their loyalty to the Ikhwan in Palestine (source: Beverly Milton Edwards, “Islamic Politics in Palestine”, p. 43). The local Ikhwan had its own agenda, defending its lost land. It didn’t require fanaticism, outside influence or even propaganda. The refugees themselves were living proof of the horrors of deportation and suffering. The identification as part of an international movement was concomitant with the recognition of the particularity of the Palestinian experience. The official foundation, dating 9 December 1987, was only the culmination of an organisation in the works for decades. Organised Islamic resistance was further utilised when the situation precipitated dramatically in 1967 and a new generation was born as refugees. For this generation, a return to Islam was considered as a necessity for the moral and political future of a people that was being literally destroyed. The cause of the Nakba was seen by many as the result of the distancing from a normal society, the Palestinian one, in which the ethical, religious, cultural and traditional values had been devastated by the occupation, and the descent into further degradation, poverty, disenfranchisement and social instability was seen not only as the result of the occupation, but part of its cause.

The “international community” would not come to the rescue of these people, the rest of the Ummah was not caught up in their national struggle, largely because they were not directly involved or were even prohibited from involvement. The extreme pain and disgrace of losing one’s land at that time was a new element to the area, where previous colonisation avoided expelling the indigenous inhabitants, and throwing off the usurpers was not complicated with the total loss of roots and a base. The basis for the formal dimension of Hamas was thus present for decades prior to its official birth. In order to operate, being under the thumb of the occupation, these organised groups that existed had established charities and benefit organisations for their people. These institutions were tolerated by Israel in the Occupied Territories. Israel conceded some operating space through granting of licenses. As General Yitzhak Sager said in an interview to the International Herald Tribune in 1981, the Israeli government “…gave money that the military governor allocated to the mosques […] the sums were used both by the mosques and the religious schools, with the purpose of reinforcing a subject that would contrast that of the Left that was in favour of the PLO.” If there was some motivation for Israel to be involved, it was really as an act of ‘divide and rule’, a bit of tolerance, a bit of economic support to the various religious associations in order to see if an opposition to the nationalists of the PLO could develop. They really were only looking for a way to see the weakening of the PLO, which was gaining some support in the West, and they did not found, provide major financing or in any way influence a movement that they would in some way infiltrate or control. That is pure mythology. Why give Israel credit where none is due?

2) That Hamas represents only a marginal portion of Palestinians is another myth to debunk. It is indeed true that all Palestinians are not refugees, and it is also true that virtually all of the leaders of Hamas were born in exile or at some point were subjected to the experience of expulsion and loss of their homes and possessions. This is a core Palestinian experience, and it is true that even those (few) Palestinians who were not uprooted can identify with the loss of their cultural and national identity, and all of them know that their national aspirations and cohesion as a group have been destroyed by Israel. Thus, even a movement or party that has its own identity in the refugee camps and in exile or in religious roots, is recognised as an intrinsic, legitimate and natural representative of Palestinians as a whole. They even obtained the majority vote in areas of the West Bank that were not considered as Hamas strongholds, as well as obtaining votes from many Christian areas.

3) The myth that Hamas turned “democratic enough” just to get its foot in the door as the first step of forcing an Islamic State upon the entirety of Palestine is a very widespread one, especially in the progressive circles that do not recognise the popularity of the movement or who have an ideological prejudice against any religious movement. There is much to be said in favour of separation of church and state, but this of course is something that cannot be imposed from afar, and furthermore, there are many levels of separation to take into consideration. Those who subscribe to this position of “Hamas buying time before introducing the Sharia” tend to deny that a democracy has certain characteristics, and it is not necessarily a synonym of “secularism”. When the word “democracy” is applied correctly, it has certain characteristics, and Hamas meets these. Hamas has popular consensus. It has an internal structure that is autonomous and recognised as legitimate by its constituency. It follows the rules of elections, meeting the requirements for participation. Once elected, it assumes its role within the existing system, not having overthrown or staged coups against established structures. It is a political movement with several factions (some of them armed, as is true of many parties in areas under occupation, Fatah included) with a history and an organisation. There is widespread discussion among its constituencies, including those who are political prisoners, prior to making decisions, and the majority decides the actions to be undertaken. If one thing must be said about it to set it apart from parties that Westerners are familiar with, highest level leaders generally do not assume the governing roles. This is understandable in a party where a great quantity of the leaders are routinely assassinated by Israel. That the current political director, Khaled Meshaal, must live in exile after having once been victim of an attempted assassination says more about this anomalous situation than a thousand words can.

4) That Hamas’s victory in the Legislative Council election was nothing more than a protest vote (another pet theory of the left) was brilliantly illustrated as false by Paola Caridi in her very good book (despite the sensationalist subtitle) “Hamas, What it is and what the Radical Palestinian Movement Wants”, published by Feltrinelli and only available in Italian at this time. I am translating a few paragraphs that deal with this question.

“There is a precise political reason for which the majority of Palestinians voted for Hamas. It is a reason that concerns the decision made by the Islamist movement formally on 23 January 2005. (translator’s note, a year prior to the Legislative elections): a unilateral truce, reached together with the Islamic Jihad (that had instead broken it on several occasions), which had turned words into facts: that there would be the end of the season of terrorist attacks made by Hamas inside Israel as indicated within the confines of the 1949 armistice, the Israel within the Green Line, in other words. The ending of suicide attacks in Israeli cities, substantially bringing an end to the Intifada as well as (Hamas’s) participative choice is interpreted by the Palestinian population as a precise political proposal: an alternative to those who had governed and controlled them, holding the hegemony up to that moment. A proposal that poses at the same time new de facto limits to Hamas’s resistance strategy. The Islamist movement has not been, therefore, chosen only as a protest against the corruption, patronage and inefficiency of Fatah, which as a party is often confused with the PA. Corruption, patronage and inefficiency that are related, at least from a temporal point of view, with the failure of the Oslo Accords and the “facts on the ground” realised by the Israelis.

“The people of Hamas were considered people who are serious, who did not enrich themselves at the expense of the population, in fact, they continued to live in normal neighbourhoods and in the refugee camps.” (Caridi, p. 171).

5) An extremely offensive smear, oft repeated, is that Hamas’s followers and its leaders are a “bunch of illiterates” or “religious fanatics”. Almost all the leaders are (or were, given the number of assassinations within their ranks, the past tense is de rigueur) university graduates in fields ranging from medicine and physics to jurisprudence, economics and theology, is testament itself that this smear is merely to throw dirt on them and paint them as having read only religious texts and therefore “under-developed” when compared to other movements. Education has always been one of the pillars of Hamas and its charity work. The people of Palestine don’t need to be told this, it is a reality for them, where in many cases without this foundation, Palestinians would be left wanting in this area.

6) The inflexibility of Hamas is another myth, especially yanked out when speaking of the 1988 Charter (Mithaq). Shiekh Hamed Bitauri, “religious authority of Nablus, president of the Union of the Palestinian Ulemas, known for his radical positions had no problem confirming that ‘the Charter is not the Qu’ran. We can change it. It is only the synthesis of the positions of the Islamist movement in its relations with the other factions, and its politics.’ Aziz Dweik, founder of the Department of Geography of the University of Nablus, later to become the spokesman of the Palestinian Parliament after the 2006 elections, and imprisoned in Israeli jails since the summer of that year, went even further, declaring the political and pragmatic necessity of distancing from the Mithaq of 1988 to Khalid Amayreh, Palestinian journalist that is sensitive to Islamist positions, he said that ‘Hamas would not remain as a hostage to rhetorical slogans of the past like those of the ‘destruction of Israel’.” (Khalid Amayreh, Hamas Debates the Future: Palestine’s Islamic Resistance Movement Attempts to Reconcile Ideological Purity and Political Realism, in “Conflicts Forum”, Nov. 2007, p.4) (Caridi p. 90).

Haniyeh has mentioned on many occasions that the Charter has been surpassed in its substance by the other official documents, the most important of which, the Electoral Programme of the Reform and Change List (the list in which Hamas ran for office). This programme is structured like a document that goes far beyond the needs of a political campaign, according to the leader of Hamas, and it indicates the policy of the movement. It was not written in the heat of the revolution of the Intifada, and reflects the evolution of the party. The changes present are not ideological so much as ones of a strategic and political nature. The positions have been reiterated so many times in interviews and public interventions, it seems incredible that the complexity and maturity of Hamas should by now not be apparent to everyone. It is clear that they are still dedicated to the liberation of Palestine, but they are attempting to achieve it through reaffirmation of the rights of the people, knowing full well that as a party, Hamas is not equipped to overthrow the occupation in any practical way or to destroy what they recognise as a reality.

Many of us who follow events in the Middle East hope that they do not surrender to pragmatism so far as to recognise Israel not only as a reality, but as a “Jewish State”, however, we must watch from the sidelines and evaluate facts. The people of Palestine will be vigil about what rights are being surrendered, if any, and many of us believe that backs to the wall, they will not capitulate and lose what they know is theirs for reasons of political expediency. Hamas too is aware of this fact.

7) Hamas has been far less divisionary than its principle counterpart, Fatah. The Gaza “coup” that shocked and saddened the world was actually a preventive measure to the thwart the planned takeover by the Fatah forces faithful to Dahlan (in collaboration with Israel). That Hamas was the party that was awarded victory by its own people has never been recognised by the “international community” that nevertheless pushed for elections and insisted that this was the necessity for Palestinians, because this would mean that the resistance had been granted legitimacy and would become policy within the governing body, the rejection of negotiations as sub-alternates with Israel, which was Fatah policy, had been officially sanctioned by the populace and it would only be a matter of time before the programme would become policy. So, any steps by the Fatah “Security Forces” to overtake Gaza would actually have been the coup. But in the backwards way of viewing events, fuelled by disinformation, the tragic bloodbath between Palestinians prevented the real overthrow of democracy that would have taken place had Dahlan had the chance. Again and again, Hamas has sought to work together with the opposition party, and this is something they would not tolerate in the vain hope that their economic advantage and political nulla osta from the boy’s club would allow them to command even in absence of the popular mandate to do so.

8 ) It’s not necessary to use propaganda to show to Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and in exile, and even to many within Israel, the ongoing destruction of the Palestinian civilisation and people. Blockades, bombardments, assassinations, war, checkpoint humiliations, restrictions, separation of families, imprisonment and further abuses are not isolated incidents, but they are the daily bread and water of Palestinian life. No one needs to invent a rage over a phantasmagoric enemy. There is a real one that is subjecting the people of all ages and conditions to humiliation, deprivation and death. Showing a man in a mouse costume to insist that children are being indoctrinated in hate might go down well with the uninformed masses, but a glimpse into the reality makes Farfur look like the sweetest kind of way for a child to assimilate and tolerate that he or she is a prisoner doomed for life to suffer in the most atrocious way for being born as a lesser being in the oppressors’ eyes.

9) The worst smear against Hamas is the one to keep them as the symbol of evil: that they are a terrorist group, financed by “rogue States in the axis of evil”. Bearing in mind that their financing is abysmally inferior to the gigantic economic and “military aid” package given to Israel by America, Canada and many other nations in the “international community” in an official way, why should the claim of foreign financing be considered as unacceptable when it is simply the way the that Israel keeps afloat through billions of dollars annually, up front, and heaven only knows what other financing comes in through the thousands of “charities” that are really little more than fronts for mass immigration to Israel to curtail Arab growth? If Zionism and its charities are considered as legitimate and noble, why are Islamic ones put on blacklists and the donors treated as if they are financing terrorism? There is a double standard here.

That Hamas has rejected terror operations against civilians and did its best to do so in the service of achieving a realistic improvement for the life conditions of its people is an authenticated fact, corroborated by none other than the USA Congressional Research Service, a Think Tank that basically presents its conservative and Israel-friendly positions to the Congress so that they become policy. In fact, in the document coordinated by Jim Zanotti http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R40101.pdf  Israel and Hamas, Conflict in Gaza (2008-2009), we see that the quoted “reason” for the onslaught of Gaza to “cleanse it of Hamas”, the rockets fired into Israeli territory, was nothing but an excuse that the West drank down with gusto as if it were cherry juice. The extremely rudimentary rockets were recognised as NOT having been launched by Hamas, and not only that, Hamas was viewed as being able and willing to suppress the attacks. It is significant that the first victims of the Israeli attacks in Gaza were the regular police forces who had just been trained, perhaps also for this purpose. Zanotti writes:

For the first five months, the cease-fire held relatively well. Some rockets were fired into Israel, but most were attributed to non-Hamas militant groups, and, progressively, Hamas appeared increasingly able and willing to suppress even these attacks. No Israeli deaths were reported (although there were injuries and property damage), and Israel refrained from retaliation.

Nevertheless, each party felt as though the other was violating the terms of the unwritten ceasefire. Hamas demanded—unsuccessfully—that Israel lift its economic blockade of Gaza, while Israel demanded—also unsuccessfully—a full end to rocket fire and progress on the release of Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit from Hamas’s captivity.

Israel cited the sporadic rocket fire as justification for keeping the border crossings and Gaza’s seaport closed to nearly everything but basic humanitarian supplies. Hamas, other Arab leaders, and some international and non-governmental organizations involved in aiding Gazan civilians complained that Israel was reneging on its promises under the unwritten cease-fire agreement.

If that were not enough, the author, certainly not sympathetic in any way to Hamas, makes statements about the aftermath of the war where even Israel admits that Hamas was not responsible for the rockets:

Since Israel’s unilateral ceasefire began on January 18, 2009, there have been about 40 sporadic rocket launches into southern Israel, far fewer than occurred on average per day just before Operation Cast Lead. Moreover, Israeli officials believe that smaller militant groups, such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, and not Hamas, have fired the rockets, as they did during the cease-fire (although it is possible that Hamas is enabling or acquiescing to these attacks while preserving deniability).

So, Israel used the excuse of Hamas rocket launches to justify the elimination of Hamas (by means of destruction of the entirety of Gaza) through what they call “military operations” but the rest of humanity knows is war, while they were aware that Hamas was neither the author nor the facilitator of the rockets, any kind of excuse they pull out of the magic hat to justify their actions should fall on deaf ears. Complaints about arms smuggling through the most rudimentary of tunnels should stink to high heaven when we see the Defense Budget Appropriations for US-Israeli Missile Defense Programs in that same Congressional Report. Iron Dome, David’s Sling and other “military aid” costing the American people billions of dollars are described briefly. For every five ineffective bottle rockets that are smuggled through a tunnel, the USA is flying in full cargoes of arms and cases of cash to be spent by Israel for their military “needs”. The double standards here also draw innocent blood in violation of international law at the expense of your hard-earned money. Again, from the Congressional report:

Israel may have used weapons platforms and munitions purchased from the United States in its military operations in Gaza, reportedly including, among others, F-15 and F-16 aircraft, Apache helicopters, and, according to Israeli press reports, GBU-39 small diameter guided bombs approved for sale by the 110th Congress following notification in September 2008.

Additionally, all unilateral truces between Israel and Hamas (called by Hamas, not by Israel) were broken in every case by Israel. In many cases, making incursions into the Occupied Territories, which legally they are prohibited from doing, as civilian populations under occupation (even if the “settlers” have left, Gaza is kept under siege by Israel) are required to be protected by the occupier, not attacked. Israel, using weapons and planes supplied for them by the good graces of the people of the United States, bombarded streets where their targets (politicians and clerics that Israel terms as “militants” if not worse) were located, killing in an indiscriminate way anyone in the range, children included. If that’s not terrorism, the word has no meaning.

These are only a few of the myths in circulation. They represent just a portion of the lies, disinformation and hasbara that circulates about one of the major Palestinian parties, born from within, developing as all parties do, from below, and legitimised by fair and legal elections. Debunking these lies is a duty. One doesn’t need to agree to the entire programme of Hamas, but one is obligated to recognise that they are entirely different from the image that they have been straightjacketed into. What Jessica Rabbit said in the film, “Who Framed Roger Rabbit” could very well apply to Hamas: “I’m not bad, they just draw me that way.”

This article is part of the Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala initiative The First Word War against Disinformation. If you would like to contribute your own original articles to this initiative, send them to contact@palestinethinktank.com or to tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

visit www.tlaxcala.es and www.palestinethinktank.com

The site witnessed violent disturbances two weeks ago when Israeli paramilitary police stormed the Haram Al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary) in an effort to arrest Palestinians who had repulsed an attempt by a group of Jewish fanatics who were trying to arrogate "prayer rights" at the Islamic shrine.

Dozens of Palestinians were injured, some quite seriously.

Following the incident, hundreds of Muslims from Jerusalem and also from Arab towns and villages in Israel decided to maintain a constant presence at the mosque in order to repulse new attempts by Jewish extremists to seize a foothold at Al-Aqsa compound. On many occasions, Israeli police forces threatened to storm the Noble Sanctuary if the sit- in didn't end. Meanwhile, they maintained a constant presence outside the compound. But on Sunday, the Israeli government decided to lift the siege, effectively allowing participants in the sit-in to leave peacefully.

The deal apparently was part of a behind-the-scenes understanding between Israel and Jordan whereby Israel agreed to reinstitute the status quo ante at the site and to refrain from provoking Muslim sensibilities. According to the Jordanian-Israeli Peace Treaty, Jordan retained the role of custodian of Al-Aqsa Mosque. Jordan had harshly criticised Israel for the "standoff", and unconfirmed reports indicated that the Jordanian government threatened to expel the Israeli ambassador from Amman if the provocations continued.

Indeed, King Abdullah II warned in an interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz last week that the irresponsible Israeli behaviour with regard to Al-Aqsa Mosque could spark off a huge conflagration in the region and "destroy everything". Jordan and other Muslim countries witnessed large anti-Israel protests following Friday congregational prayers.

In addition to Jordan, several Muslim countries also filed protests with Israel, warning the Israeli government that any attempt at a gradual Jewish takeover of Islam's third holiest site would be viewed as crossing an ultimate red line by Muslims, and would also put an end to any semblance of peacemaking efforts in the region. The protests prompted Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to publicly deny that Israel was harbouring hostile intentions with regard to Al-Aqsa Mosque.

"Last week extremist figures tried to undermine Israel's stability. This is an extremist minority that spread lies about Israel digging under the Temple Mount [Haram Al-Sharif]. This is a lie," he said.

Another Israeli official, Trade and Labour Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer warned that Israeli Arabs were beginning to "link up" with Hamas against Israel. "A certain alliance is forming between Israeli Arabs, specifically the Islamic Movement, and Hamas," Ben-Eliezer told Israeli state-run radio, adding that Israel would eventually pay a heavy price if this was permitted to continue. Muslim leaders in Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied Palestinian territories scoffed at these statements, calling them "brash lies".

"Israel is trying to tell the Muslim world that this is a confrontation with Hamas. This is a lie, because Al-Aqsa Mosque belongs to the entire Muslim umma (nation) and Israel is trying to demolish the mosque or at least arrogate part of it in order to build a temple for Jews," said Sheikh Raed Salah, head of the Islamic Movement in Israel.

Salah was arrested briefly last week on charges of "incitement against the state" and of "making contacts with a terrorist organisation" — an allusion to Hamas. Both Salah and his deputy, Sheikh Kamal Khatib, have also been barred from entering Jerusalem for 30 days. Israel has accused Salah and other Muslim leaders of carrying out "subversive activities" and "orchestrating" claims about an Israeli conspiracy against Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The restoration of calm at Al-Aqsa Mosque seems to vindicate the view of Muslim leaders that the main source of tension was Jewish provocations, particularly the repeated attempts by messianic Jewish fanatics to enter the mosque — not as ordinary tourists, but as provocateurs and troublemakers. Sheikh Ikrema Sabri, a chief imam and preacher at Al-Aqsa Mosque, said Muslims in Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine would never stop resisting and protesting efforts by Jewish intruders to establish a foothold or gain "prayer rights" at the Muslim shrine.

The current relative calm is unlikely to last for long, however, given the determination of messianic Jewish groups that are bent on demolishing Islamic holy places in Jerusalem in order to build a Jewish temple on their ruins. Some of these groups, such as the Temple of Faithful, believe that Jews won't attain redemption until Al-Aqsa Mosque is destroyed and a Jewish temple is erected in its place. According to extremist Jewish doctrine, the ensuing violence that would see the death of a huge number of people would expedite the appearance of a Jewish Messiah, or Redeemer, who would bring about salvation for Jews and rule the world from Jerusalem.

Messianic Jewish groups, which exert a lot of influence on the Israeli government and parliament, and even the army, seem to show little deference to any government decision to maintain status quo ante arrangements at Al-Aqsa Mosque esplanade where the Muslim Waqf (religious endowments authority) has been managing the holy site since 1967. A few days ago, a number of Jewish intruders disguised as foreign tourists entered the mosque despite tacit Israeli assurances to the contrary. Similar attempts, coordinated or uncoordinated with the government, are expected in the coming days and weeks.

Moreover, it seems that the current right-wing Israeli government fully identifies with the declared and undeclared goals of the extremists, despite any public stand to the contrary. Indeed, not a single member of the current government has criticised — let alone denounced — the fanatics for their repeated provocations.

This week, Sheikh Salah alluded to Israeli government collusion with messianic fanatics. He said nothing short of a full liberation of Al-Aqsa Mosque from the Israeli occupation would shield the Muslim sanctuary from harm. "The Israeli government is the prime mover of all plots against Al-Aqsa Mosque. The important thing is not what they say to the media, but what they do at, around and especially beneath Al-Aqsa Mosque."

The recent Turkish decision to exclude Israel from an aerial military exercise over Turkish territory is another indication that Turkey will not allow itself to be blackmailed by criminal international Zionism.

Following the decision, Zionist officials and media sought to mitigate its impact on the increasingly troubled relations with Turkey by claiming that it had little to do with the genocidal blitz which the Israeli army carried out in winter against the Gaza Strip.
However, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Turkey, and other Turkish officials  have made  it amply clear that the cancellation of the military drill is consistent with the feelings of the vast bulk of  the Turkish masses vis-à-vis the Nazi-like atrocities in the Gaza Strip.

This week, Erdogan once again invoked the mass killings by the Israeli army of hundreds of Palestinian children, using white phosphorus shells and other weapons of death.
The Turkish premier argued convincingly that Turkey has an influential public opinion and that it was the government’s duty to take it into consideration.

His remarks have effectively silenced Zionist pretensions and attempts at self-assurance that Turkey would budge to Zionist pressure.

To be sure, Israel is unlikely to succumb to the new reality of Turkish-Israeli relations, namely that the quasi-Islamic leadership of  Turkish republic will not just play deaf and dumb and look the other way if the Zionist regime keeps up its genocidal crimes against the helpless and innocent civilians in occupied Palestine.

Zionist circles, incensed by their inability to intimidate or bully the Turkish leadership, are likely to be devising ways and means of retributions against Turkey.

These might include instigating the Jewish-controlled American congress to declare the anti-Armenian campaign of 1915 a “genocide” or even a “holocaust.” More importantly, Israel and its Zionist circles are likely to step up efforts to incite the traditionally secular Turkish military establishment to topple the democratically-elected government.

Israel has had a reputation of inciting the Turkish military against civilian governments that dared deviate from the Zionist line.

A classical example was the Zionist-envisaged coup against the first Islamic Prime Minister of modern Turkey, Necmittin Erbakan in 1997.

Moreover, Israel could still manipulate a vast network of Freemason agents to destabilize the Turkish government.

Zionism played a pivotal role in effecting the downfall of the Ottoman state after Sultan Abdul Hamid II adamantly refused repeated Jewish solicitations for a national Jewish home in Palestine.

Nevertheless, Israel would have to be extremely cautious about any provocative interference in internal Turkish affairs since this could boomerang badly on Israel and cause irreparable damage to Israeli-Turkish relations.

Also, the increasingly stable relations between the Turkish government and the military establishment are likely to make any Zionist-inspired conspiracies against the stability of Turkey more difficult than ever before.

The exclusion of Israel from the Anatolian Eagle exercise seems to be a popular measure for most Turks who are disquieted by recurrent efforts by government-backed Jewish extremists to arrogate a foothold at the Aqsa Mosque in occupied Jerusalem, one of Islam’s holiest sanctuaries.

In addition, the decision is manifestly morally right. After all, which country, let alone an Islamic country, would host warplanes that only a few months ago were raining death on helpless and unprotected children throughout the Gaza Strip, killing, maiming and incinerating thousands of innocent people, and utterly destroying thousands of homes, mosques and other civilian buildings?

The Zionists will always try to defend or cover up their evil crimes, now exposed by the Goldstone report, with obscene lies.

They would claim, as the former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni did this week, that the virtual genocide in Gaza was not an anti-Palestinian act but rather an “anti-terrorist act.”
But such claims are nothing short of a fornication with language.

After all, it is well-established that the vast majority of the victims of the Gaza blitz were innocent civilians. This fact is readily recognized by human rights groups such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and even Israel’s own B’tselem group which monitors Israeli army crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories.

So could it be that the entire world is wrong about what happened in Gaza while the Judeo-Nazi thugs in Tel Aviv are right?

The Turkish leadership should therefore be applauded for its moral commitment toward  the helpless Palestinians, many of whom have Turkish ancestry, who are languishing under an unmitigated Nazi-like military occupation.

This Turkish approach to Israel, an entity whose very existence constitutes a gigantic war crime, or a crime against humanity, is the least any Muslim country can do to prevent a possible genocide against the Palestinians.

This is why, other Muslim (and non-Muslim) countries with diplomatic ties with the Israeli regime ought to learn a moral lesson from Turkey and stop having “business as usual” with the Nazis of our time.

I am saying this  because it is a Nazi act par excellence to employ the most advanced technology of death  to exterminate innocent civilians who are even denied access to food and fuel as well as  some of the basic amenities of life, on the ground that a few Israeli settlers were killed and injured by primitive projectiles fired by desperate Palestinian resistance fighters who found themselves very much in a situation resembling  that which faced the anti-Nazi resistance fighters in Europe during the Second World War.

I am sure that conscientious people around the world, including many Jews, know in the depth of their hearts that what Israel did in Gaza ten months ago, and what it has been doing to the Palestinians for decades, belongs to the same moral category under which Nazi atrocities are listed.

This is why it is a moral obligation of the highest order upon all people of conscience and honesty, irrespective of religion and race, to condemn, expose and isolate this nefarious regime that is trying to consolidate the law of the jungle in place of international law.

Failing to do so, God forbid, means that the law of the jungle will prevail.

            –Famed British Historian Professor Arnold Toynbee

I wholeheartedly agree with Professor Vasillopulos's assessment on the hypocrisy, double standards and marked subjugation of U.S. foreign policy vis à vis Palestine to Israel's interests and its powerful American lobbies who have unprecedented influence on Congress. Israel's very creation arose out of Western colonialism, first the British who had the audacity to gift a land they did not own, a land under Ottoman rule, to European Jews out of domestic political expediency, followed by America, a government ruled by corporations and special interests, in this case the powerful Jewish lobby.  Israel's ethnic cleansing of 750,000 Palestinians from their land in 1948 – 1949, its total destruction of 450 Palestinian villages, including the destruction of mosques and churches, was simply accepted by western colonial powers as a necessary consequence of an Arab military onslaught on the small Jewish state, something that was a proven blatant lie as documented by Israel’s own documents. Tragically Israel’s brilliant propaganda, media campaigns and effective political public relations to indoctrinate the Western population were successful. The Arabs were too incompetent to even understand the use and power of such instruments.    Israel’s prowess to influence and determine Western public opinion has allowed it to defy all international agreements, laws, U.N. Resolutions, world opinion, even U.S. policy as evidenced by Obama’s forced backtracking on his initial call for Israel’s freezing illegal settlements.   

Obama’s silence on the Goldstone Report once again shows who runs U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

While Israel can tell the world “No”, the Arabs sadly don’t even know the word exists.   

In 1949 President Truman was so outraged (the man responsible for Israel's creation) by the mass expulsion of Palestinian refugees he convened the Lausanne Conference in Switzerland to pressure Israel to stop its ethnic cleansing and accept UN Resolutions 181 (Partition of Palestine) and 194 (right of return of Palestinian refugees).  

Israel rejected Truman's proposal while the Arabs accepted it prompting his envoy Ambassador Mark Etheridge to write Truman: " Since we gave Israel birth we are blamed for her belligerence and her arrogance and for the cold-bloodedness of her attitude toward refugees…Israel must accept responsibility….her attitude toward refugees is morally reprehensible….Her position as conqueror demanding more does not make for peace.”

Since then many U.S. politicians have quietly expressed their anger and frustration at Israel's continued Zionist expansionism in the Holy Land, but none have ever had the courage to stand up to this little nation while in office that manipulates the most powerful nation on earth to pay and die for Israel's wars from Lebanon, to Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, the Gulf, Afghanistan, and now the deja vu campaign to "bomb, bomb, bomb" Iran.

Yet while we as Arabs and Muslims can reiterate the historical facts regarding the rogue nation of Israel and its chosen method of existence that wholly depends on wars, assassinations, terrorism, mass imprisonment and the wholesale starving siege of Gaza, we should be honest with ourselves and proclaim that Arab political and economic incompetence, paralysis, hypocrisy, backbiting, and self sabotage regarding Palestine is the other side of the coin to decades of Palestinian suffering. Fifty-seven Muslim nations, 1.6 Billion Muslims, 50% of the world's oil wealth, 60% of its gas wealth, trillions of dollars of investment in Western governments and institutions, are shamefully paralyzed to face one small nation of 6 million Jews.  Western politics revolves around money, media manipulation, myths, lies and propaganda, something Arabs are well accustomed to in their own nations.

There is no true political, economic, social or media presence for Arabs and Muslims in America. They are silent, fearful, uneducated and inexperienced in living and dealing with America's culture, tend to herd themselves by ethnic group and fight whether there should be a barrier between men and women in the mosques, or whether Muslim men and women can gather for a lecture, yet allow such women to mingle, work, and go to school with Non-Muslims.

I strongly believe that we as Muslims must blame ourselves for our state of affairs and avoid the usual scapegoating that "powerful forces" such as Israel, the E.U., and America hinder our progress or our justified right to reclaim our lands and resources. Our "intellectuals" have adopted and imitated the Western mantra that progress can only come if one abandons religion. Rather than Islam being the problem, Muslims are the problem and Islam is the solution.

That is why as a Muslim I am deeply proud of the Turkish government and the Turkish people for being the sole Muslim nation to publicly repudiate Israel on its slaughter in Gaza. While Arab leaders convene "summits" on Palestine their private agenda is to attack Hamas and Hezbollah, the only two resistance parties in the entire MidEast against Israel. The shame and betrayal of Mahmoud Abbas to withdraw consideration of the Goldstone Report is another hallmark that even Arabs don't value Arab blood as long as their chairs are protected.

Muslim wealth is bailing out Western economies and not benefiting the current confused Muslim generation lost between little faith and overwhelming American cultural influence.  Why is our wealth not building schools, hospitals, better roads, working on finding precious water, creating manufacturing jobs, building sewage plants, collecting garbage and using the media to improve our knowledge of Islam, its morals, and goodly behavior.  We build towers, buy luxurious toys such as planes, cars and camels, while neglecting the betterment of human lives.    Arab Satellite channels open their programs with readings from the Quran only to follow up with a music video of barely dressed women gyrating their bodies to the most obnoxious simplistic drum beat.

Each of us as Muslims is responsible for learning, implementing, and protecting our faith. Each of us is responsible for ourselves, our families, our neighbors, community, nation, and Ummah. Our silent acceptance of our corrupt till death do we part rulers has led to our failed societies. 

We need a renaissance of intellect, of education, scientific and analytical and skills, in fact, a rebirth of a highly motivated Ummah that rejects the status quo and begins the journey to a faith based enlightenment that can only result in our victory against our own demoralizing failures and the ultimate victory of salvation in the hereafter.

I share the pessimism of Muslims around the world that we're not ripe for a personal and nationalistic revolution, but what's the alternative? Should Muslim blood saturate the earth to replace our stolen oil before we awaken to our demise?

Either we change, die, or die trying.

As an early and enthusiastic Barack Obama supporter and a professor of international relations who teaches Middle East politics and American foreign policy, I have been often asked in class and in public forums, “What do you think Obama will do regarding Palestine?”

My answers came down to that there was likely to be a dramatic improvement in the tone of American-Arab relations and with the Muslim world in general, but only within the limits of a continuing stalemate in Palestine.

This prediction has turned out to be all too true, as welcome as better general relations are. I am more pessimistic now, nine months into the Obama administration. I would say now that even when or if the domestic agenda calms down, if some form of health care gets passed, the economy recovers and the withdrawal of troops in Iraq takes place as planned, there will be no substantive improvement in the plight of the Palestinians. Israel will continue its policy of changing the facts on the ground, each day making concessions on settlements, Jerusalem, the wall and a multitude of other anti-Palestinian activities all the more difficult.

I have two reasons for this view — one direct, one indirect. Although far from Palestine, the war in Afghanistan is now Obama’s war. This increasingly evident futile effort — to do what? — eliminate al-Qaeda? bring democracy to the country? secure Pakistan? The list grows with each headline. I realize the pledge to root out terrorist bases was largely a promise driven by the campaign. Democrats are eager to show they are as murderous as Republicans on any issue related to national security, especially during an election campaign. Obama, however, seems sincerely committed to his policy. “The right war, the right time. It is not a war of choice but of necessity.” So goes the rhetoric. What president ever says a war he supports is the wrong war fought at the wrong time and is not necessary? And of course the war in Afghanistan remains a politically cheap way to establish Obama’s national security credentials. How many Americans object to the killing of Muslims, so long as any connection, however tenuous, can be made with terrorism, however ill defined? Given the interconnectedness of political issues, Obama cannot afford to lose any domestic support. Muslims will thus continue to provide the pound of flesh demanded by the Shylocks of national security.

Foreign policy elite retains hold on Palestine issue

Although I more or less anticipated these dreary developments, I retained my hope for Obama’s Palestinian policy. Perhaps, I reasoned, by demonstrating “strength and resolve” in Afghanistan, he would buy some leeway in Palestine? Always a slender hope, this thread now seems severed. Despite the appointment of George Mitchell, the foreign policy elite which has dominated Palestinian issues for decades remains intact. Apart from some rhetorical flourishes, almost immediately recanted or “put into the context of our undying commitment to our greatest ally, Israel,” nothing has changed. Settlements expand, despite their manifest illegality and official condemnation by the UN, the US included sort of. The wall continues to lengthen, creating more misery for Palestinians. The military incursions continue at the slightest excuse, killing and maiming civilians, including women and children.

I realize that Obama is much more skeptical than Bush-Cheney of Israel’s ultranationalist religious right. But how much difference will this make since the only viable opposition is also a right-wing party with a Palestinian platform virtually indistinguishable from the current extremist government that has avowed anti-Palestinian racists, like Avigdor Lieberman, in the cabinet? Let me suggest why I believe the Obama administration is not committed to substantive change in America’s policy toward Israel, which is to say America’s virtual absorption of the Israeli point of view in Palestine and the entire Middle East. Again, we must make an inference, since it is foolish to go by US rhetoric in this region. For any positive change to take place in Palestine, if America is to be taken seriously as an “honest broker” in the region, still the official policy, despite being thoroughly discredited, I believe it is imperative for Obama to discuss the danger of Israeli nuclear weapons.

My principal reason for pessimism is that every time Obama or Hillary Clinton refer to the unacceptability of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, they refer to non-existent Iranian weapons and ignore hundreds of Israeli nuclear warheads. The American mantra reconfirmed by Obama-Clinton is “no nuclear weapons in the Middle East.” Who can disagree with this? Who wants nuclear weapons in the Middle East or anywhere else for that matter? The difficulty with the American mantra could not be more simple or compelling. It is false in its premises and false in the facts. Americans have accepted nuclear weapons in the Middle East, so long as they are Israeli. And Israel has had nuclear weapons for over 30 years, hundreds of war loads and missiles capable of reaching every capital in the region. Every time an American official intones the mantra that “nuclear weapons are unacceptable in the region,” the hypocrisy bell clangs. Therefore, my critical indicator of change in American policy regarding Palestine is this: Would Obama say that all nuclear weapons in the Middle East are unacceptable, including those of Israel? So far there has been a resounding silence, except for the hypocrisy bell. Clang! Clang!

Much more is at stake than political consistency and the credibility dependent upon it. There is a much greater problem entailed in the mantra than a flagrant double standard. The very stability of the region, one of the principal objectives of American foreign policy, is being held hostage to this absurd mantra. So long as Israeli nuclear weapons are ignored, there can be no nuclear stability in the region. As every nuclear strategist knows, it is inherently unstable for only one adversary to have nuclear weapons. Nuclear deterrence, that is, nuclear stability, requires mutually assured destruction (MAD). This doctrine holds that stability requires that each nuclear power has the ability to retaliate effectively after the most devastating attack possible. This is called “second strike capability.” To be effective, it must inflict unacceptable damage to the nation which struck first. This has been the logic of nuclear stability ever since the Soviet Union developed its ability to strike the US. Its only assumption is the belief in the sanity of those who hold the nuclear triggers. Like it or not, precarious or not, MAD has worked. There is no reason to believe its fundamental logic no longer applies. It has applied regionally as well, as the case of India and Pakistan demonstrates.

Of course, the assumption of sanity is properly called into question by religious and other fanatics. No one wants such true believers to have control of nuclear weapons. “Aha! Therefore, we have to stop the Iranians!” The problem with this corollary of the American mantra is that it ignores Israeli fanatics, who are more firmly in control of Israel and its nuclear weapons than Islamic fundamentalists are in control of Iran and its non-existent nuclear weapons. No one doubts that Israel would use nuclear weapons on the Arabs, whether or not they have been attacked with such weapons. Everyone fears that Israel, rather than be defeated, would resort to nuclear Armageddon. Indeed this is one of the principal reasons that America does all it can to avoid an Israeli defeat. To the degree this is true, American foreign policy is held hostage to the existence of the Israeli monopoly of nuclear weapons, a fortiori, when Israel is controlled by right-wing fanatics, as is the current case.

There are alternatives to giving in to the threat of Masada. One is of course the denial of the American mantra. This would recognize the logic of deterrence by allowing Iran to develop a second strike capability vis-à-vis Israel. Or America could provide the second strike force by guaranteeing the nuclear security of every country in the region. America has provided nuclear deterrence for Japan for 60 years. America has made it clear that a Soviet or Russian attack on Europe would be considered an attack on the US. One can only wonder, however, if this protection applies to Muslim Turkey. If so, it has been kept very quiet. Or, thirdly, nuclear stability can be obtained by disarming Israel. Each of these options requires American acknowledgment of the existence and danger of Israeli nuclear weapons.

Nuclear instability a risk

Failure to do so condemns the region to nuclear instability, because (1) it gives Israel a free hand and (2) it gives other powers in the region an overwhelming incentive to develop their own deterrent capability. The American mantra that “nuclear weapons are unacceptable in the Middle East” is thus far more than hypocritical. It undermines American interests in the region, chiefly oil. And it imperils the lives and property of hundreds of millions of people. As a political realist, neither of these factors would, by itself or in combination, condemn American policy, if there were a reason to run these tremendous risks. What is this reason? The survival of Israel? There are two things wrong with making Israeli survival the predominant objective of American Middle East policy. It assumes that 5 million Israeli Jews are more important than more than 200 million Arabs, to say nothing of Turks and Iranians. No one even makes this argument in public, except the religious zealots of the Chosen People. Moreover, leaving human life aside, it assumes that resourceless Israel is more important than energy-rich Arab lands. Can one imagine an American capitalist making such an argument? Or an American motorist? From the realist perspective, unless it can be reasonably argued that Israel helps America meet its strategic objectives in the Middle East, America’s unquestioned support of Israel is absurd. One need not even get to the question of morality, the murder and oppression of millions of Palestinians, to conclude that America’s alliance with Israel comes at much too high a price.

It is important to note that this conclusion does not even broach the difficult topics surrounding a viable Palestinian state. My point is that no serious discussion of these topics can be undertaken until American policy makers acknowledge the facts of Israel’s nuclear monopoly. For Israeli nuclear weapons have emboldened right-wing Israeli governments to further and deepen their oppression of the Palestinians. And Israeli nuclear weapons have intimidated American policy makers who do believe that a Palestinian state is not only just but necessary for good relations with the Arab world.

I am compelled to warn that the next time we hear Obama intone the mantra that “nuclear weapons in the Middle East are unacceptable,” we should hear more than the “clang! clang!” of hypocrisy. We should hear the bell sounding the knell of political rationality. And what will take its place, if not the irrational forces of hatred, bigotry, racism and fanaticism?

While preparing the insertion of the article by Nahida Izzat About anti-Semitism, as do all of her thoughtful and intense contributions, many segments caused me to reflect. Her analysis and especially her questions are so important and meaningful, that it would only be logical to address them bit by bit, and I would like to begin with a segment that I believe holds the core to so many of the difficulties of keeping the Palestinian Nakba on the table… it’s that presence in the room of the elephant of the Holocaust.

Incredible, it seems as though it is often the primary argument discussed. I don’t mean only by those who back Israel tooth and nail, but even by those who claim that Israel as a Jewish State must come to an end. Nahida’s first question:

Why is it that we Palestinians are constantly reminded of the horrors of the holocaust, when we had nothing to do with it? 

Yes. Why? Why is it the argument in a UN General Assembly the week that the Goldstone Report on the Gaza War was released? Why is it that we have to bear yet again with the Israeli PM raging on about the Holocaust and about how Ahmadinejad denies it, so therefore, “all good people of the world, keep the light of the Holocaust burning bright and let’s keep the focus on Israeli victimhood, current vulnerability and the danger Iran poses” becomes the leitmotif of the day, week, month, year… It is permanent, fuelled constantly.

The Goldstone Report was no small feat of the UN to pull off, and some focus there would have been something close to a dream come true: it was the outcome of an official UN commission headed by a respected judge (a Jewish South African) which revealed that Israel engaged wilfully, deliberately and recklessly in war crimes against the people in Gaza… not in the 1940s, but just last winter.  So why did Netanyahu rant and moan? The response is simple: to shift focus with the justification for it that “Ahmadinejad is denying the Holocaust”. But the question begs… Did he?

Had he mentioned the Holocaust in the speech to the UN? I could find not one reference to the Holocaust, much less it’s being denied or not. It was not even mentioned. Yet, what does Netanyahu do? He brings the argument there, because it is beyond doubt that it is effective for Israel’s goal of achieving world sympathy as well as condemnation of Iran, which is a goal of a big part of the “International Community”, and for various nefarious reasons. It gets “sexed up” with the nuclear threat, as if this is indeed the major problem and issue regarding humankind, and we get more and more of these claims that are not really ever verified, “Iran’s got it,” “not yet but close,” “Iran could strike Israel very soon.” All of it backed a few days later by the most intense PR mistake that Iran could muster, long range missile tests. It doesn’t matter now what they do or say, we see the film of the missile set off in a loop for hours and hours on every news show or even commentary.

As I often do, I wonder who’s advising Ahmadinejad, because it sure works wonders for pushing the “Israelis in danger” narrative. Are nuclear weapons going to help bring down the Zionist regime? I really do doubt it, but they sure do a lot to gain them support from the wealthy international community and the political and public backing that would keep Israel’s survival (as a Jewish State) as the priority. I would say that on the face of it, it looks like backward logic.

While Netanyahu and the West rant and rage about the alleged sins of Iran’s President in order to help Israel stay on the top of the game, we see another really bizarre trend in this “constant reminder of the Holocaust”. Surprise surprise, it’s not only the main theme for those whose purpose for existing is to enable Israel who are keeping the “constant reminders of the Holocaust” in the place of prominence. It is also the committed anti-Zionists who like to keep this fil rouge of Ahmadi and the Holocaust running.

Gilad Atzmon, whose views about Zionism are almost always astute, makes the same mistake that Netanayahu does. In his recent paper about Ahmadinejad, Who is a Jew? just a few days after the UN brou-ha-ha he writes: “It is pretty much impossible to deny the fact that Ahmadinejad's take on the holocaust and Israel is coherent, consistent and valid. He seems to have three main issues with the narrative…” and he elaborates on these elements which include numbers, the relevance of historical revision and on the Western responsibility for it.

In the past few years, and in quite a noticeable way, the references to the Holocaust have been decreasing. Did Ahmadinejad deliberately omit the issue of the Holocaust in his important UN speech (which obviously, and predictably, no one seems to know the content of or its theme?) Quite apparently this is the case, and it is indeed plausible that he did it because this was his intention. Nor was the Holocaust mentioned in his speech in Geneva at the International Conference on Racism. 

In fact, there is deliberate omission of the matter, and if the translation is to be trusted, we see that he actually says what is not even his own theory, but rather something close to a fact, that is repeated as well by Netanyahu, that the establishment of Israel in Palestine was “in fact, in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe.” Following is the entire quote:

Following World War II, they resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless on the pretext of Jewish sufferings. And they sent migrants from Europe, the United States, and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in the occupied Palestine… [Delegates walk out in protest. Applause] And in fact in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe… Okay, please. Thank you. And in fact in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive, racist regime in Palestine. [Applause]

One may ask themselves the classic questions: If we know that the Israelis are always up in arms about Ahmadinejad/Holocaust, and that they use this as justification for reinforcing their garrison mentality and use it effectively to get more money, arms and support, and then if Ahamdinejad has actually reduced this kind of intervention from his international speaking appearances – why is this focus constantly there even by those who are against the Zionist State and its garrison mentality as if he had indeed said what Netanyahu wants everyone to believe he said? If we are getting our information from Ynet and the Western mainstream media, of course we are using distortion as our resource. We have to be careful to avoid that error. When we are debating, discussing the Holocaust of the Second World War, an event that is over, finished and (as both Netanyahu and Ahmadinejad concur) compensated for at least for the Jews, what space does that leave us for debate, discussion and dissemination of information on TODAY’S Holocaust, the Nakba of the Palestinian people? Has a single Palestinian EVER been compensated for the losses which started at the beginning of the last century and are increasing in violence and frequency? No. Certainly not. Nor have the Lebanese been compensated for the losses they have suffered in the brutal war raged against them… no, not in the past century, but just three years ago.

Is it very productive to reiterate the same narrative of Netanyahu even when it’s an instrumental distortion of reality and the Palestinians are tired of it? Is it productive for the Palestinian people?

Another question by Nahida: Why is it that we Palestinians, are to suffer the same fate as the victims of the holocaust by the hands of those who brag worldwide to act for “never again”? 

I would venture to guess, Nahida, that your situation is always pushed to the margins because it is simply not deemed as being interesting enough, and Jews and Israelis have been successful in rendering their own situations more appealing, even by way of deceit and distortion.

It seems obvious that while the Holocaust was indeed used as a pretext for the establishment of the Jewish State in Palestine, it had a lot more than that “going for it”. It was always used by the West to cover its own sins such as Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden occurring in the same years. It was used to have an “ultimate evil” to point to… in this way, there is no self-reflection that would lead to change, which is actually what political writing in the West often aims to do. Once you have an evil that is defined as something that will be unequalled, once you have established clearly that there is a group that is represented as being a victim more worthy of pity than any other victim (so that any other suffering is going to be relatively inferior), the mechanism of turning a blind eye to Palestinian and Arab suffering can become the norm. And, suffer they must, if there is to be a Jewish State in Palestine, which is simply a racist construct that dictates that Jews have rights that “non-Jews” (the negation terminology is interesting) shall never have. In fact, those who are non-Jews are also peddled as “enemies” even by the institutional peaceniks adored in the West and used for the Hasbara, such as David Grossman and Noa. When you have an enemy, naturally, the narrator is a good guy and almost “forced” into “defence”. It’s a great and handy little game for the Israelis, and the Palestinians have not yet been able to show the world the full extent of their situation. Part of that is because Palestinians are denied a voice and they are often told that it would be preferable for them to follow the arguments that those in Europe or North America are dictating. The very most they can do is to learn to be satisfied with assuming the passive victim role in some progressive sites.

I’ve been running Palestine sites for a long time, but before that, I’ve been reading these sites. It is quite interesting that aside from independent blogs, the Palestinian voice is the exception, not the rule,  in the progressive or pro-resistance media. I believe that Palestine Think Tank is a happy exception, because most of our contributors and editors are Palestinians, as well as the majority of our content being written by Palestinians. However, just a glance on almost any site about Palestine in English, you are going to find out quite soon that the Palestinian voice is nearly absent. You will see papers (mostly) by Jews and Israelis, articles taken from Haaretz, books by Americans and Britons, but the Palestinian voice is not given its due space.

It certainly is not because they do not have opinions and do not express them well. PTT alone is testament to the variety, vibrancy and originality of these writers.  Sometimes, it seems, there is a lot of gatekeeping surrounding what Palestinians say, and by those who make a point of defending freedom of speech for those whose main or sole argument is the Holocaust. I will enter into detail further in this article.

Self-criticism and self-analysis are the basis of any transformation, personal and national alike. Active transformation in the form of popular uprising, which by now a vast majority of Palestinians see as inevitable and necessary, given the failure of politics, also entails the awareness of the level of distress that is growing, distress that time is running out and that even the most basic Palestinian requirements and demands will not be met, as even the most steadfast resistance movements contemplate the realpolitik of recognition of Israel as a Jewish State. This would ratify an enormous injustice, and cancel forever the chance of return. It is necessary for Palestinians to voice all of their views and to act, as the feeling is strong that time is not on their side.

Revolutions imported from anywhere else but internally, among the people, are by necessity viewed with suspicion. The foundation of a popular revolt is always internal. It entails coming into consciousness of the corruption and ineffectiveness of the system or leaders, and thus instilling and encouraging the active, revolutionary spirit of resistance. It is an overthrowing of the mentality that “the people” are passive subjects who must be controlled and must surrender their consent, even against their better judgment. There is no ruling or governing body in the world that tolerates too much dissent.

Every Western country prides itself on claiming that it tolerates dissent. Whether they actually do or not is questionable, but this is at any rate one of the yardsticks to measure the level of democracy they have achieved. Within activism, the dissenting voice is indeed the dominant one. Thus, promotion and support of self-critical voices, whenever they have the freedom to arise, as this is always a risk, is a necessary basis for changing a negative status quo. Fighting gatekeeping within our ranks is a primary concern, and Palestine Think Tank has never backed off on fighting this unhealthy censorship mechanism. Especially vocal gatekeepers, as we know, are the Jewish activists, who always have been very effective in keeping their agendas as the dominant ones. They tend to impose focus on arguments that are more interesting to them, and ones they presumably feel are interesting to others. These arguments are invariably the “Jewish experience”, past, present and future. This naturally includes the two hot topics that always stir up attention, anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. These issues are woven into every discourse, as we have seen, by Zionists and anti-Zionists alike, as if the Jewish experience is indeed the interesting one, and the Palestinians simply have to adjust to playing second fiddle, even at the cost of “constantly being reminded” of these issues, precisely the complaint that Nahida has made in her recent article. As both Meshaal and Nasrallah have said, with the blood of their people still fresh from Israeli aggression, “there is a real Holocaust going on today”, the Holocaust against the people of Palestine and Lebanon.

It is with the goal of keeping the Palestinian and Arab demands for freedom and the necessity of promoting their own voices, that this site has published hundreds of articles by Palestinians and Arabs which call for a more active involvement in building their own future, and refusal to negotiate away their rights, or allow anyone else to set their agenda. At the end of the day, they ought to know what is best for themselves more than a European, American, Israeli or Jew does. This was the spirit of the excellent article by Mohamed Khodr, An Embarassment of Riches and Riches of Embarassments where he pointed out the vast level of the failure of governments in Arab nations to be true to the principles of Islam, often at the expense of the Palestinians. Another important article that was similarly self-critical was by Sami Jamil Jadallah What is Wrong with the Palestinian People? It was his appraisal of the apparent Palestinian complacency in the face of betrayal of the Palestinian people at every level. Anyone who engages regularly with Palestinians knows that this is a big part of the content of their conversations. There was nothing really new or shocking in these positions, despite the enormous pain being expressed of being unable to get angry enough at this state of affairs. The apathy, caused by years of neglect of their cause and the extreme subservience they have in the global sphere, leads to a lack of hope and the feeling that there is no chance to control their own destiny. There is also a frequent tendency of activists who are neither Muslims nor Palestinians to be unaware of this condition of frustration, and they prefer as well to not “offend” Palestinians and insist upon viewing them exclusively in the prism as the “victim” who is waiting for rescue from afar.

Certainly, Palestinians and Muslims are the victims of the worst sort of oppression and war. Their ability to counter the multitude of factors keeping them defeated can’t be denied by anyone. However even “victims” have the capacity to rise up and contribute to the discourse in all of its dynamics. They have the right to mobilise themselves, to speak their minds against not only the Israelis, but also against the “House Arabs” who sell them out or bend to pragmatism when it will run counter to their fundamental demands.

The only effective resistance has only ever been when people stop waiting for approval from outside, when they stop hoping for reform or rescue and when they point their fingers at traitors and encourage healthy rage. Effective resistance has only been determination to not be subjects of someone else’s projects for them or to fit into a profile people have outfitted for them, but to see themselves as the creators of their own destinies. The case of Palestinians is more complicated than one might imagine. It seems as if new hurdles are set in front of them at every turn: they have been unfortunately abandoned by the world when they applied the democratic principles of elections and their situation is further complicated by their’s being a dynamic and complex society that is divided into factions and geographically separated. Acquisition of one’s own narrative, of one’s own power to dissent, being recognised as the protagonists and not the side issue, this is something Palestinians are attempting to gain and their efforts are necessary to enable their own resistance at all levels, and the unity they need to succeed. One is free to disagree with the content of their discourse, but one has the obligation to not discourage the necessary act of their right to free speech.

While circulating especially thought-provoking or controversial papers, as I do at times to a small mailing list of readers, I encouraged the reading of this bitter, painful but powerful essay that offered many points for discussion. I was included in a group mailing of some dozen or so people started by a Jewish activist primarily focused on the subject of the Holocaust who has written a half dozen or so essays, some of which I’ve published. The fact that I may not agree with everything he has written did not however prevent me from encouraging him to write more often so that his right to say unpopular things that could be discussed was safeguarded by me. This is what he wrote:

I don't think this piece should have been written (certainly not in English) and should certainly not have been posted on your website.

I had to wonder if this the same person who wrote back in 2006, published on my previous site, Peacepalestine:

The last point on Ernst and Ingrid (Zundel) has become something of a mantra that I have had to recite so many times in the last year or so: Neither Ingrid nor Ernst has ever used violence, nor have they ever called on anyone else to use violence. Neither has ever discriminated against anyone on ethnic or religious grounds, nor have they called on anyone else to do so. Finally, and for me, most importantly, neither has ever suppressed anyone's right to think, speak and write freely or called on anyone else to do so. Can the same be said for their opponents – particularly those anti-Zionist, and often Marxist Jews?

Whatever I say or write is always characterised by doubt and hesitation. Some have said that this is because I'm afraid of coming clean about my beliefs. But that's not true. It's simply that I am never so sure about anything, other than the value of keeping an open mind and tolerating other opinions.

Evidently, the value of keeping an open mind and tolerating other opinions, well, at least a Palestinian one, has been scrapped.

Besides the fact that the Palestinian author has a long track record for actively demanding redress from the Jews without renouncing the Palestinian right of return, calls for justice, truth and comprehensive archives of all the appropriations of Palestinian property and of all crimes committed against his own people, something hindered time and again by the PLO, calling for his silencing or censorship of him on a Palestinian site is quite inappropriate.

Is tolerance of others’ opinions only a value if those opinions coincide with one’s own or if they are being expressed by a Westerner, Israeli or Jew? Wouldn’t it be more constructive, rather than suppressing someone else’s right to think, speak or write freely or telling an editor they should certainly not have published work one disapproves of, to debate the author? To understand his views? To challenge his claims that one disagrees with and ask him to substantiate them?

Well, my contact in the mailing group didn’t only ignore that invitation to him to do so, something I’ve always encouraged all to do with his own writing, he also chose to not participate in the lively debate between the author and many other people, most of them Palestinians. It seems as though the issue was of great interest and relevancy to quite a few people. Well, that’s his loss, because others have gained by the experience. Someone who is by and large considered to be the maximum expert on and opponent of the Israeli and Jewish lobby, Jeff Blankfort, had this to say in the comments:

Sami, your opening piece on this thread has really made me look at the reality with new eyes. The time has indeed come to put away the bombast, romanticism, and delusions that have contributed to the current situation and not wait for another generation yet to be born to liberate the land.

As an editor and translator of activists for a decade, particularly for writers whose focus is the occupation of Palestine, quite a few of them Palestinians, in fact, I have seen and edited and published every type of argumentation: obviously, this fact would prevent me from agreeing with all of the content, but it is not my duty to censor, but to facilitate discourse. The arguments are so varied in their dominating theme, be it religious, secular, socialist, revolutionary, feminist, Arab Nationalist, pragmatic, strategic, focused on sensitising Westerners, aimed at an Arab public, even satirical pieces that refer to themes that are quite particular. For many of these writers, getting their issues to a broad public is an infrequent event. Although the material is extremely enlightening, the lack of exposure of their voices keeps their issues in the margins. Just the idea that Arab Nationalism as a means of gaining Palestinian liberation, a major item of discourse in the Middle East, is all but unheard of in many progressive sites should not be surprising. These sites are busy (still) thinking about the Holocaust rather than issues that interest Palestinians and are part of a strategic paradigm. As a Palestinian person once wrote in comments on the site, “If I convert to Judaism, I think I will all of a sudden start becoming interesting to people. Should I do it?”

So, with all of this in mind, I have a few modest proposals to make for those who are involved in any way in the Palestinian issue:

1)      Freedom of speech should be the right of everyone. This would include the right and duty to critique people’s arguments as well as criticise across the board, “House Arabs”, “censors and gatekeepers”. They aren’t really serving the Palestinian cause, are they? If they are, we need to know how.

2)      Demand broader dissemination of the Palestinian and Arab voice. They alone are the victims of Western, Imperialist and Zionist domination, and indeed, they are the last victims of the Holocaust. Anyone who can, should encourage their right to dissent, just like Westerners expect for themselves.

3)      To get the Holocaust issue once and for all in its perspective and not as the core issue of international policy and the consequential activist focus. Just like 9/11 has shown us, focus on one single dramatic event, even when all the facts will never be made available, serves as a pretext to legitimise things such as the Global War on Terror and the actual wars against nations that are the consequence of this. New wars are being planned and justifications made for them in the same moment that old wars are still producing their scores of victims. This precaution should be heeded since it is proven again and again that this is the modus operandi. If focus on Holocaust we must, let us focus on the Holocaust of epic proportions going on in Gaza right now.

4)      Ahmadinejad is not Iran. He is the President who governs in a situation of major internal dissent on the verge of further popular explosions. He should not be used as a convenient instrument to attack the sovereign nation of Iran. His words about the world situation may be sincere, but he must be judged (primarily by his own people) by his actions, not all of which do gain popular support and some of which feed the Israeli paranoia. But, his words MUST actually be the ones he is using, not some narrative of him that can be pulled out as an instrument for any cause, be it Zionist or anti-Zionist.

The active choice for those who seek true and complete Palestinian liberation has to be openness to the voices that do not accept compromise or surrender of their rights. Support of people who will not betray the Palestinian and Arab search for freedom. We have to have faith in the power of the Word, in the power of popular uprising, and continue to have faith in the future of the Arab populations who WILL set their own agendas and speak their own minds without waiting for anyone’s permission or approval. Like all of us, they are seeking solutions to their problems and analysing their own reality, putting it in the spotlight, where it belongs. They are tired of being “constantly reminded of the Holocaust”, and who can blame them?

The diversity of their voices is an asset that needs to be consolidated, not a liability to eliminate. Different thoughts contribute to growth, and the more we hear, the more we learn. Variety, diversity, space for participation and discussion of the issues that Palestinians find important is the key to keeping their agenda on the table and raising the consciousness that is at the basis of all resistance. Free Minds for a Free Palestine is not just the motto of our site. This IS a THINK tank, after all!

Loss Of Innocence: Gaza children's artwork

The paintings show the destruction of apartment blocks, mosques, ambulances and civilians, through the use of helicopters, planes, drones, phosphorous weapons, bulldozers and direct fire from soldiers. The sun, trees, birds and Gaza cry. Gaza sends an SOS and the world simply stands still and looks on. A Dove of Peace, in one painting, sails in a boat over a Desert of Indifference. As a result of Operation Cast Lead over 300 children were killed, many more injured, 1400 children orphaned of at least one parent, 30% of children suffer serious mental health problems and all the children are traumatised. Not surprisingly, the children say that what they dream of for the future is freedom and peace. 
  
The launch of the exhibition took place in the cathedral on Saturday 26th September. The Cathedral Dean welcomed everybody and Professor Victor Merriman from Liverpool

Hope University, gave a remarkable and inspiring keynote speech. Rod Cox guided people around the exhibition adding interesting personal anecdotal material to each painting. A wonderful team of volunteer stewards have patiently watched over the precious paintings from 8am-6pm every day for the duration of the ten-day exhibition.

Hundreds of visitors have now viewed the exhibition. Their comments attest to being profoundly moved and shocked by the children's paintings. Photographs of the paintings in the setting of this magnificent cathedral, the largest cathedral in the UK, will be sent to the children in Gaza so that they can follow the progress of their artwork and know that people are seeing their truth: the truth of the assault. The exhibition has been booked by schools, colleges, conferences and hospitals in the UK where it will continue to do its invaluable work of reaching the hearts and minds of ordinary people.

Anne Candlin

Exhibition Co-ordinator, Liverpool

October 2009

FFI

YouTube movie showing the contents see

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=575N0JRzaIs

Rod Cox has a website with some background information at

http://rodcoxandgaza.blogspot.com/

Currently on show at the Cathedral in Liverpool see

http://www.liverpoolcathedral.org.uk/content/musicandevents/whatson/detail/Loss_of_Innocence__Exhibition__Gaza_childrens_artwork_until_6_Oct_09/371.aspx

http://rodcoxandgaza.blogspot.com

UPDATE! NEW ADDITIONS IN SPANISH AND ARABIC. FIRST WORD WAR – PALESTINE THINK TANK AND TLAXCALA DECLARE WAR ON DISINFORMATION.  (Original art for PTT and Tlaxcala by Carlos Latuff). Our second instalment features Nahida Izzat, Adib S. Kawar and Issa OnLine. Translations into Spanish, English and Arabic by Manuel Talens, Victoria Blanco, Atenea Acevedo, Mary Rizzo, Issa, Adib S Kawar and with the help of Fausto Giudice and Esteban Garcia. German to follow.

The First Word War

NAHIDA IZZAT  –  About anti-Semitism 

Talking about anti-Semitism, and the accusation of anti-Semitism, is to many people a very sensitive issue, nevertheless, I feel the need to highlight some points: 

As a Palestinian and as a Muslim, with first hand experience of racism, whether here in UK or in occupied Palestine, I do understand what it means to be subjugated to it; thus, I deeply empathise with those who suffer from the menace of racism and discrimination, those who are abused verbally, physically, emotionally, or otherwise for no other reason than the fact that they are “different”. 

And I also do understand the awful feeling and dreadful sensation of being subjugated to subtle racist looks or remarks, only felt by you and not the people around you. 

However, I do see a huge difference between a racist remark directed at a person or a group for their beliefs, race, or whatever that which makes them different, and between a snarl, a sneer or sarcasm against an occupying criminal entity called “israel” and its people for their CRIMES. 

One must not fail to distinguish between the rage and fury caused by watching helplessly for decades the grim unstoppable crimes go unpunished year after year, and the racist blind hatred that might still exist among a tiny minority who, by nature, would be hating anything and anyone who is different anyway. 

Furthermore, this occupying entity called “israel” (a word that I myself detest to even pronounce and generally avoid to use) is not a theoretical being, nor does it operate in a vacuum; it’s neither an abstract concept nor a conjectural void.

It’s an entity run by PEOPLE 

PEOPLE who make decisions, 

PEOPLE who elect politicians,

PEOPLE who ALL serve in a barbaric army, 

PEOPLE who foster racist beliefs, attitudes and actions, 

PEOPLE who invaded others’ land, dispossessed them, and forcibly occupied it, 

PEOPLE who imprison children and shoot babies' hearts,

PEOPLE who destroy world heritage, 

PEOPLE who steal water, land, sea and sky, 

PEOPLE who kill hope, life, beauty and smiles, 

PEOPLE who build their colonies on the blood and ruins of another people. 

It is an entity of PEOPLE, 94% of whom voted for the attack on Gaza. 

It is an entity of PEOPLE, 71% of whom want U.S. to strike Iran.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/860903.html 

It is an entity of PEOPLE who violated ALL neighbouring countries. 

It is an entity of PEOPLE who live on a STOLEN land for over six decades, with no signs of shame, remorse, awakening of conscience, or willingness to neither admit nor right the wrongs they’ve committed. 

Every normal person with some compassion, would make a grimace of disgust and revulsion when hearing about such an entity or such a people who commit such despicable horrors. 

Now, I find it difficult to be persuaded that such a reaction to such horrific crimes -when hearing the name “israel” or “israeli”- is an act of racism (anti-Semitism).

On another note; we  Palestinians do not have any responsibility whatsoever for the crime of the holocaust, nor do we carry the burden of European racism against Jewish people. 

Furthermore, I do not see a difference between any kind of racism including racism directed against Jewish people known as anti-Semitism. If we accept racism against Jewish people as being different, then it implies that we accept the racist absurdity of “Jewish exceptionalism”. Racism is racism, many causes, same consequences. 

Thus, I do not see the suffering of Jewish people (horrible as it was) as a unique kind of suffering which must be revered and viewed as essentially and fundamentally different from other human suffering; the same way that I do not see our suffering as Palestinians as unique or different from any other. 

Questions come pounding:  

Why is it that we Palestinians- are constantly reminded of the horrors of the holocaust, when we had nothing to do with it? 

Why is it that we Palestinians, are to suffer the same fate as the victims of the holocaust by the hands of those who brag worldwide to act for “never again”? 

Why would the UN want to enforce the study of the history of the oppressors and occupiers -holocaust- upon children languishing in refugee camps who themselves along with their parents, and grand parents were victims of ethnic cleansing, planed and executed by those whom they are supposed to feel sympathy with? 

Why is it that we are persistently bogged down by the fixation on anti-Semitism, while for sixty years (a century rather), we are the ones who are relentlessly suffering from a most vile evil racism (ethnic cleansing gradually becoming a form of “final solution”) perpetrated by a whole population of racist zionists?  

(with all honesty, I must tell you that some times I imagine it would’ve been easier and less painful to us to be gassed and killed immediately rather than this policy of excruciating slow death that we have been going through for over a century). 

How could the world keep asking us to recognise the “humanity” of a settler, who comes with his wife and children armed to his teeth, and at gun point evicts a Palestinian family, throws their entire belongings out, and moves in? 

What kind of “humanity” is this?  

And most importantly, why is it that we are continuously been asked to feel compassion towards our tormenters who relentlessly murder and humiliate us, who attempt to annihilate us and our history and why, to what purpose, are we asked to feel their “humanity”, while their knife still piercing deep in our hearts? 

Finally, I cannot speak on behalf of all the Palestinians, but as for myself, I must admit, the recent Gaza events was the last straw that broke the camel’s back; before that, I used to think that there is hope, those PEOPLE would wake up to their “humanity” one day, and regret the evil that they’ve done, unfortunately, the more I see of them, the more I realise that this hope and dream was an illusion. 

Over the past few years, I have been reading and debating with many of those “soft” zionists in the so called “peace camps”, all I found is an extremely arrogant groups of people, who are incapable of recognising, admitting, or willing to rectify the crimes they’ve done. 

 They are only interested in “peace” to protect their interests and to further secure their grip hold on the stolen land. 

Moreover, very recently, and by sheer accident, I stumbled across some honorific information that reveals the severity of decay of morality and lack of humanity amongst those RACIST zionists – whose ideological bigotry and chauvinism surpasses all other- that left me in a state of shock for days; crying, shaking, suffocating with palpitations and suffering from severe panic attacks. I hope and pray that I would be one day soon, able to write about the awful reality that caused so much anguish, distress, shocked my very foundation and traumatized my essence. 

Undoubtedly, the world community should leave it to the victims to decide how to deal with those criminals in the future. Only the victims can investigate the fragile alleys of forgiveness or punishment. The victims should have the last say irrespective of what their judgment might be, they should not be vilified, indicted or moralized with, for they have suffered more than enough. 

The emergence of forgiveness and reconciliation requires certain conditions:

1)     Stopping the crime

2)     admitting of guilt

3)      asking for pardon

4)      and rectifying the wrong

None of these conditions are ever considered as an option amongst that mighty sick racist society. 

As for me, I have no authority to talk in the name of all Palestinians, but I can state with all honesty, I DO NOT wish the zionist murderers, those of whom were directly or indirectly involved in massacres, theft of land, subjugation and oppression, to remain in Palestine after its liberation from the occupier.  Except of course for the very few good people amongst them, as no soul should carry the liability of another- I do not wish the invader, occupier and criminal racists to stay in Palestine, the land that they incessantly raped, destroyed and disfigured, nor do I desire them to be my neighbours. 

They have shown no respect, no appreciation, and no love to this land or to her people. 

They do not deserve to live there. 

But these are only my own feelings, and I know that the decision is not mine. 

More on anti-Semitism 

There are some more points that I would like to draw attention to: 

1) “israel” calls itself a Jewish state, and claims to be acting for all Jewish people, by Jewish people.  It is still enjoying the moral and financial support of the majority of Jewish communities world wide. The absence of a huge uproar of denunciation and disassociation by the majority of world Jewry, makes it hard for people not to blame zionist  Jews who live outside occupied Palestine for their guilt of complicity, active alliance or passive complacency by either silence or aiding and sustaining the criminals. 

2) “israel” still enjoys the protection of the “Security Council” with its US vetoes on any UN resolution sanctioning “israel’s” endless list of ongoing crimes and infractions of international law, and the “israeli” criminals still roam with impunity, free from prosecution by any jurisdiction. This intolerable situation inevitably foments further rage and fury against the double standard and special treatment granted to the Jewish state.  

3) The excessive use of the term “anti-Semitism”:

a) by zionist Jews, accusing all non zionists

b) by soft zionists Jews, accusing anti zionist Jews

c) by anti zionists Jews, accusing fellow anti zionists Jews and also non Jews of anti-Semitism as soon as they dare to examine Judaism with critical eye, criticising some aspects of it, some beliefs, attitudes or behaviours. 

All this has participated in creating a sense of repression of freedom of expression, and undoubtedly also a sense of being subjected to what feels like intimidation and thought control. 

It has also diluted the meaning of the word anti-Semitism, making it practically devoid of any signification. It is now used ad nauseam, ad absurdum, reduced to a simple rhetorical trick, slapped in the face of anything and anyone, as soon as there is the slightest inspection of facts. The word has lost its effectiveness to expose a form of racism, I am afraid. The more we hear it used inappropriately, the more indifference its further future usage will raise. Worse, it may even -God forbid- contribute to a form of blow-back   …the story of the boy who cried wolf is only too familiar. 

So, a sincere advice from a heart that cares, to all my Jewish friends who are really interested in preventing the re-emergence of real “anti Semitism”, and to those “israelis” with some humanity left; I would say: 

1) Instead of wasting time searching for the "humanity" within “israeli” criminals, focus your energy on fighting and revealing “israeli” crimes and exposing its inhumanity,

2) Disassociate your selves completely from such an entity and proclaim this annulment loud and clear,

3) Let go of the idea that anti Semitism is a “special” case of racism; treat all racism with the same degree of unambiguous condemnation,

4) Try to look at the situation from the standpoint of non Jewish people, who will not accept or understand the insistence on the uniqueness of the Jewish suffering, whereas the world has seen since the end of WW2 the massacres of millions and millions of non Jews.  The world is inflamed by hatred against Muslims, not against Jews,

5) With love in my heart, with sincere and pure feelings, I would appeal to you to look inwards and search for reasons, as to why you feel that the world should accept racism against you as somehow worse or different, and as to why you feel that your suffering is unique and unlike others’ , because this is not how the world sees it. All suffering has the same value to those who go through it, and all racism has the same consequences and must be ostracized with the same ferociousness,

6) Those of us who are involved in the support of Palestinian cause are inevitably going to be accused of anti-Semitism, that does not make us in any shape or form anti-Semites, for we know very well that we are not; hence, false labels, and bogus allegations should not frighten or deter us, distract us or hinder our determination of doing what we think is right, 

7) And finally, please, do not freak out when people point out to certain aspects of Judaism and the Jewish culture that they might not like or find incompatible with humanity, equality or fairness, after all this has always been accepted by other religions, belief-systems and cultures, and this is what freedom of thought and freedom of speech are all about, people have the right to look at different ideologies, scrutinize them, criticise them and sieve out what appears to be hindering the human moral development, as long as all this is done in a non-offensive manner, without slander or abuse, but rather in a respectful, academic, genuine and good-intentional search for truth. 

PS: I know that what I have said might appear too strong, unfamiliar, or painful to hear, but I can only speak of what’s in my heart, as I believe that only through openness and honesty that trust can be built. 

We have a saying in Arabic; “sadeequka man sadaqak, wassaddaqak”

صديقك من صدَقك و صدّقك

 “Your true friend is that who is honest with you and who believes you” 

Arabic word for honesty: sidq

And for friend: sadeeq

Both friend and honesty share the same root: sa-da-qa= told the truth

My love as always

nahida

Courage doesn't always roar.    
Sometimes courage is the little voice
at the end of the day that says . . .
I'll try again tomorrow.      

   ~ Anne Henninghake

فليتكَ تحلو والحياةُ مريرة

وليتكَ ترضى والأنامُ غضابُ

ألا ليتَ الذي بيني وبينكَ عامرٌ

وبيني وبينَ العالمينَ خرابُ

إذا صحَّ منكَ الودُ فالكلُ هينٌ

وكلُ الذي فوقَ  الترابِ ترابُ

Also on Tlaxcala: http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8891&lg=en

Spanish Translation by Victoria Blanco and Manuel Talens Below.

The First Word War is an initiative by Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala. Send your submissions to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

The First Word War

ADIB S. KAWAR  -  Colonies vs. Settlements 

This is colonization & not settlement!!!
 
The war of words is most commonly used by the Zionist movement to justify the land theft of other people's property to sound as if it is a justified and legal action; so they play on words, and instead of using the right words or terminologies to explain their actions, which disclose their crimes against humanity they have been and are still committing, they employ a different term, instead of using the right word for the dwellings they build on the stolen land, they say "settlements" rather than using the right terminology, namely, "colonies".

An indigenous people naturally increases in numbers; so they have to build new dwellings on their own inherited, rightly and legally owned land, what they are doing is that they naturally are settling and expanding on their own land. These new dwellings, which are settlements or towns by no means could be called colonies, as is the case with foreign invaders' dwellings, which are nothing but colonies.

On the other hand, a foreign invader conquers a foreign land with the aim of colonizing it. They will implement any justification for what they are actually doing.  When they are building new dwellings on the invaded land, which is an act displacing its indigenous population and replacing them with an imported invading population, what they are building by the force of arms and terror are colonies built on stolen lands, they are by no means to be considered settlements.

We the generation who were born and raised in our own land, Palestine, and saw the influx of Zionist Jews trying to colonize our land by any means possible to them with the help of British occupation. We used the right description for what they built on it, we always called the dwellings they built, colonies (musta3marat in Arabic) and never heard and of course called them "settlements" (mustawtanat in Arabic), as is the case lately.

Also on Tlaxcala here:

Spanish Translation by Atenea Avecedo follows below.

The First Word War is an initiative by Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala. Send your submissions to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

The First Word War

Kissa On Line – Hello Um Ali….It’s Avital Leibowitz calling…

Translated from French by Mary Rizzo

A comment left on my article regarding Bernard-Henri Levy* (BHL) by a reader of the blog who has signed as TAXE, that he had declared on a French television programme that the Israeli army was “…extremely moral… it is the most moral army in the world since, prior to attacking a neighbourhood, it asks the inhabitants to leave their homes…”

This is, for BHL, one of those things that are so rare and are a great sign of civilisation.

And to think that the readers of my blog are often telling me to not say any more dirty words.

Who could believe this discourse, it is nothing different from the continuous affirmation that the Zionist army does nothing but defend its own citizens. This stratagem, enormous as it is, has brought me to compose this little play that you can read under the form of a screenplay. 

Scene 1   interior / day

Within a room, at the home at Hay Ezzaytoune in Gaza. One hears explosions outside. A telephone rings. A door opens and a women enters from the right. She is Um Ali and she answers the phone. The camera moves in closer until there is a close up. There is an off-screen voice that can be heard. Um Ali says:

- Who’s calling?…

- Good morning Um Ali… how are Ali and Abu Ali… This is Miss Khamass… Avital Leibowitz… I would like to speak to you in the name of the Israeli Army…

- Abi…what?…

- Avital Leibowitz…miss Khamass…

- miss…what…

- Miss Khamass…listen …we have some phosphorus bombs to drop… some GUB39 to dump… rather, we have a dozen cluster bombs… We apologise for any inconvenience… only a question of half an hour… and we’ll have done our work… sorry for the inconvenience.

 - You piece of shit…. You no good son of a bitch…

One can hear the sound of projectiles whistling past…Boom …Kaboom…Zvoom…

The room is set on fire… Um Ali falls to the floor… there is an incredible amount of dust… two walls fall in… the phone dangles by the cord and swings over the ground… one can hear:

-Hello Um Ali.. are you still there?… this is Miss Khamass… Avital Leibowitz.

Avital Leibowitz, spokesperson for the Israeli army is nicknamed  “Miss Khamass”, and she uses the word “Khamass” many times each minute in every one of her televised declarations.

*BHL: French Neocon who thinks he is a philosopher. He is a fierce defender of Zionism and Israel.

French and Arabic follow.

The First Word War is an initiative by Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala. Send your submissions to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

 Also on Tlaxcala here: http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8900&lg=en

 Nahida Izzat – Sobre el antisemitismo

AUTOR:  Nahida IZZAT

Traducido por  Victoria Blanco y Manuel Talens 

Aunque para muchas personas hablar de antisemitismo y acusar a alguien de antisemita es un asunto muy delicado, siento la necesidad de destacar algunos puntos: 

Como palestina y musulmana que ha sufrido el racismo en carne propia, tanto en el Reino Unido como en el territorio palestino ocupado, entiendo lo que significa vivirlo y, por lo tanto, me siento sumamente identificada con todos quienes sufren la amenaza del racismo y la discriminación, con quienes padecen abuso verbal, físico, emocional o de otro tipo sólo por el hecho de ser “diferentes”.

También comprendo el horrible sentimiento y la terrible sensación de estar sometida a sutiles miradas o comentarios racistas que sólo yo percibo, no la gente a mi alrededor.

Sin embargo, también advierto una enorme diferencia entre un comentario racista, dirigido a una persona o a un grupo por sus creencias, raza o lo que los vuelve diferentes, y un gruñido, un comentario despectivo o sarcástico en contra de una entidad ocupante criminal denominada “Israel” y su población a causa de sus CRÍMENES. 

Hay que saber distinguir entre la ira y la furia que, año tras año, han despertado décadas de crímenes espantosos, totalmente impunes, del ciego odio racista que aún pueda existir en una pequeña minoría, la cual, de todos modos y por propia naturaleza, odiaría lo que fuera y a cualquiera que fuese diferente. 

Además, esa entidad ocupante llamada Israel (una palabra que detesto pronunciar y suelo evitar) no es un ser teórico, ni funciona en el vacío; no es un concepto abstracto, pero tampoco un vacío conjetural.

Es una entidad operada por GENTE.

GENTE que toma decisiones.

GENTE que elige políticos.

GENTE que sirve EN SU TOTALIDAD a un ejército brutal.

GENTE que fomenta creencias, actitudes y acciones racistas.

GENTE que invadió la tierra de otros, los despojó, y ocupó dicha tierra por la fuerza. 

GENTE que encarcela niños y dispara a los corazones de bebés.

GENTE que destruye el patrimonio mundial.

GENTE que roba agua, tierra, mar y cielo.

GENTE que mata la esperanza, la vida, la belleza y las sonrisas.

GENTE que construye sus colonias sobre la sangre y las ruinas de otra gente.

Es una entidad en la que el 94% de la GENTE votó a favor del ataque contra Gaza.

Es una entidad en la que el 71% de la GENTE está deseosa de que USA ataque a Irán.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/860903.html 

Es una entidad de GENTE que no ha respetado a NINGUNO de sus países vecinos.

Es una entidad de GENTE que vive en una tierra ROBADA desde hace más de seis décadas, sin mostrar signos de vergüenza, remordimiento, conciencia o deseo de admitir o reparar los daños que ha causado. 

Cualquier persona normal, con algo de compasión, expresaría una mueca de asco y repugnancia ante dicha entidad o dicha gente, capaz de cometer horrores tan viles. 

Por eso, me resulta difícil aceptar que una reacción así ante crímenes tan terribles –que cualquiera sentiría al escuchar los nombres Israel o israelí– sea un acto de racismo (antisemitismo).

Por otra parte, nosotros los palestinos no tenemos ninguna responsabilidad en los crímenes del holocausto, ni tampoco somos responsables del racismo europeo contra el pueblo judío. 

Asimismo, tampoco veo diferencia alguna entre los distintos tipos de racismo, incluido el racismo dirigido contra los judíos, conocido como antisemitismo. Si aceptamos que el racismo contra las personas judías es diferente, entonces estaríamos aceptando el absurdo racista de la “excepcionalidad judía”. El racismo es racismo; con muchas causas, pero con las mismas consecuencias. 

Por lo tanto, no considero que el sufrimiento de los judíos (que fue realmente horrible) sea de un tipo exclusivo que deba ser venerado o visto como esencial o fundamentalmente distinto de cualquier otro sufrimiento; de la misma manera que no considero que nuestro sufrimiento, como palestinos, sea único o distinto de otro tipo de padecimientos. 

Se me agolpan las preguntas:

¿Por qué se nos recuerda constantemente a los palestinos los horrores del holocausto cuando no tuvimos nada que ver con él?

¿Por qué debemos sufrir los palestinos el mismo destino que las víctimas del holocausto a manos de aquellos que alardean mundialmente con la bandera del “nunca más”? 

¿Por qué querría la ONU imponer el estudio de la historia de los opresores y los ocupantes (holocausto) a los niños que se consumen en campos de refugiados, a esos niños que, junto a sus padres y abuelos, han sido víctimas de una limpieza étnica planificada y ejecutada por esos mismos a quienes, supuestamente, deben comprender? 

¿Por qué se nos relaciona constantemente con el antisemitismo, cuando durante sesenta años (en realidad un siglo) hemos sido víctimas incesantes del racismo más vil y maligno (una limpieza étnica que gradualmente se está convirtiendo en una especie de “solución final”), perpetrado por una población entera de sionistas racistas?

(Con toda franqueza, a veces imagino que hubiera sido mucho más simple y menos doloroso si nos hubiesen asesinado de inmediato con gas en vez de sufrir esta política de insoportable muerte lenta que hemos estado padeciendo durante más de un siglo). 

¿Cómo puede el mundo exigirnos que reconozcamos la “humanidad” de un colono que viene con su esposa e hijos armados hasta los dientes y, a punta de pistola, desaloja a una familia palestina, arroja afuera sus pertenencias y se instala en su casa? 

¿Qué tipo de “humanidad” es esa?

Y lo que es más importante, ¿por qué se nos pide con tanta insistencia que sintamos compasión por nuestros torturadores, que nos asesinan y humillan sin piedad, que intentan aniquilar a nuestra gente y nuestra historia? ¿Y por qué, con qué propósito, se nos pide que sintamos su “humanidad”, mientras que su cuchillo sigue clavado en nuestros corazones? 

Por último, no puedo hablar en nombre de todos los palestinos, pero sí en el mío, y debo admitir que los últimos acontecimientos en Gaza fueron la última gota que desbordó el vaso; antes solía pensar que aún había esperanza, que esa GENTE algún día tomaría conciencia de su “humanidad” y lamentaría el daño causado, pero lamento decir que, cuanto más veo de ellos, más me doy cuenta de que esta esperanza y este sueño son sólo una ilusión. 

He pasado los últimos años leyendo y debatiendo con muchos de esos sionistas “moderados” en los llamados “campos de la paz”, y lo único que he descubierto son grupos de personas arrogantes, incapaces de reconocer, de admitir o de querer rectificar los crímenes cometidos. 

Sólo les interesa la “paz” mientras les sirva para proteger sus intereses y para asegurar su posesión de la tierra robada. 

Además, hace muy poco tiempo y, por accidente, me topé con cierta información honorífica que revela la severidad del deterioro de la moralidad y la falta de humanidad entre esos sionistas RACISTAS (cuya intolerancia ideológica y chovinismo superan todo lo demás), que me sumió en un estado de shock durante días; llorando, temblando, asfixiándome con palpitaciones y sufriendo de graves ataques de pánico. Espero y rezo para que un día no muy lejano sea capaz de escribir sobre la terrible realidad que me causó tanta angustia y aflicción, que conmocionó mis principios y traumatizó mi esencia.

Sin lugar a dudas, la comunidad mundial debería dejar a las víctimas la decisión sobre la manera en que esos criminales serán tratados en el futuro. Sólo las víctimas pueden atravesar los senderos del perdón y del castigo. Las víctimas deberían tener la última palabra, con independencia de cuál sea su juicio, no deberían ser vilipendiadas, acusadas o juzgadas moralmente, puesto que ya han sufrido suficiente.

El perdón y la reconciliación requieren ciertas condiciones:

1) Detener los crímenes,

2) admitir la culpa,

3) pedir perdón, y

4) reparar el daño causado.

Ninguna de estas condiciones se considera una opción en esa poderosa sociedad racista y enferma.

En lo que a mí respecta, no poseo autoridad alguna para hablar en nombre de todos los palestinos, pero puedo decir con toda franqueza que NO deseo que los asesinos sionistas, aquellos que estuvieron involucrados de manera directa o indirecta en las masacres, el robo de la tierra, el sometimiento y la opresión, permanezcan en Palestina después de su liberación del ocupante. Excepto, desde luego, por aquellas pocas personas buenas que hay entre ellos, ya que ningún alma debe cargar con la responsabilidad de otra, no deseo que los racistas criminales, ocupantes e invasores permanezcan en Palestina, la tierra que han violado, destruido y maltratado sin cesar, y tampoco deseo que sean mis vecinos. 

No han mostrado respeto alguno, ni gratitud ni amor por esta tierra o su gente.

No merecen vivir allí.

Pero estos sentimientos son sólo míos, y sé que no he de ser yo quien tome la decisión. 

Más sobre el antisemitismo

Me gustaría señalar algunos puntos más:

1) Israel se denomina a sí mismo Estado judío y, según él, actúa en nombre de todo el pueblo judío, por el pueblo judío. Goza además del apoyo moral y económico de la mayoría de las comunidades judías del mundo entero. Ante la ausencia de protestas o de desvinculación por parte de la mayor parte de los judíos, parece difícil que no haya quienes consideren que los judíos sionistas que viven fuera de la Palestina ocupada son culpables de complicidad y complacencia activa o pasiva, ya sea por guardar silencio o por ayudar y apoyar a los criminales.

2) Israel sigue gozando de la protección del Consejo de Seguridad de Naciones Unidas a través de los vetos de Washington ante cualquier resolución que pretenda sancionar la interminable lista de crímenes e infracciones del Derecho internacional por parte del Estado sionista y los criminales israelíes actúan con total impunidad, sin verse inquietados por ninguna jurisdicción. De manera inevitable, esta insufrible situación hace que aumenten la rabia y el resentimiento contra el doble rasero y el tratamiento especial que recibe Israel.

3) el uso excesivo del término antisemitismo:

a) por parte de los judíos sionistas, que lo utilizan para acusar a quienes no lo son;

b) por parte de los judíos sionistas buenos, que lo utilizan para acusar a los judíos antisionistas;

c) por parte de los judíos antisionistas, que lo utilizan para acusar tanto a judíos antisionistas como a quienes no son judíos de antisemitismo, y ello tan pronto como éstos se atreven a analizar el judaísmo con ojos críticos y le reprochan algunos aspectos, algunas creencias, actitudes o comportamientos.

Todo esto se ha combinado para crear una sensación de ausencia de libertad de expresión y, sin duda, también una sensación de vivir sometidos a lo que parece intimidación y control del pensamiento.

También se ha diluido el significado de la palabra antisemitismo, que ha perdido prácticamente todo su sentido primigenio. Hoy día se utiliza hasta la náusea, hasta lo absurdo, como un simple recurso retórico o bofetada ante cualquier cosa y cualquier persona, tan pronto como alguien intente analizar el menor de los hechos. Me temo que la palabra ha perdido su eficacia a la hora de definir una forma de racismo. Cuanto más la escuchamos de forma inapropiada, más indiferentes nos sentimos ante su uso futuro. Lo peor es que, Dios no lo quiera, podría incluso suceder que se volviese como un búmeran contra quienes la usan. El cuento de Pedro y el lobo resulta en este punto demasiado familiar.

Por eso, desde el fondo de mi corazón les diré lo siguiente a todos mis amigos judíos interesados en impedir que reaparezca el verdadero antisemitismo y a aquellos israelíes a los que aún les quede humanidad:

1) En vez de perder el tiempo tratando de encontrar "humanidad" en los criminales israelíes, utilicen sus energías para desenmascarar los crímenes israelíes y mostrar su carácter inhumano;

2) Desvincúlense por completo de esa entidad y proclamen su nulidad con todas sus fuerzas;

3) Abandonen la idea de que el antisemitismo es un caso especial de racismo; condenen cualquier racismo sin la menor ambigüedad;

4) Traten de analizar la situación desde el punto de vista de quienes no son judíos, quienes no aceptarán ni comprenderán la insistencia en el carácter único del sufrimiento judío, puesto que desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial el mundo ha sido testigo de las masacres de millones y millones de seres que no eran judíos. El mundo está lleno de odio contra los musulmanes, no contra los judíos;

5) Con todo el amor de mi corazón, con mis sentimientos más sinceros y puros, les pido que hagan introspección y busquen comprender por qué están convencidos de que el mundo debería aceptar el racismo que padecen como peor o diferente y por qué piensan que su sufrimiento es único y diferente del de los demás, ya que no es así como el mundo lo ve. Todos los sufrimientos tienen el mismo valor para quienes lo padecen y todo racismo tiene las mismas consecuencias; por ello, todos deben ser condenados con el mismo encarnizamiento;

6) Quienes apoyamos la causa palestina vamos a ser inevitablemente acusados de antisemitismo, lo cual no nos vuelve antisemitas, porque sabemos muy bien que no lo somos; por eso, las falsas acusaciones y los alegatos falaces no nos van a asustar ni a disuadir ni tampoco nos impedirán hacer lo que consideramos justo;

7) Y, por último, por favor, no se ofusquen cuando alguien señale algunos aspectos del judaísmo y de la cultura judía que quizá no les agrade o encuentren incompatibles con la humanidad, la igualdad o la imparcialidad, pues lo mismo les ha sucedido a otras religiones, sistemas de creencias y culturas, que lo aceptaron sin problemas, ya que a eso se resume la libertad de pensamiento y de palabra: todos tenemos derecho a analizar, criticar y cribar lo que parece estar dificultando el desarrollo moral humano, siempre que lo hagamos sin ofender, calumniar o avasallar, buscando la verdad de forma respetuosa, académica, genuina y bien intencionada.

P.S. Sé que lo que acabo de decir puede parecer muy fuerte, poco familiar o doloroso de escuchar, pero es lo que siento y estoy convencida de que la confianza sólo puede construirse hablando con claridad y honradez.

La lengua árabe tiene un dicho: “sadeequka man sadaqak, wassaddaqak”

صديقك من صدَقك و صدّقك  

Es decir, “Tu verdadero amigo es aquel que es honrado contigo y te cree”.

En árabe, honradez se dice sidq y amigo sadeeq. Ambas palabras comparten la misma raíz, sa-da-qa: “dijo la verdad”.

Con todo mi amor, como siempre,

Nahida   

Also on Tlaxcala here: http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8890&lg=es

Para leer otras entradas de esta Primera guerra mundial de las palabras, pinche aquí

Colonias, no asentamientos  -  Adib S. Kawar 

Traducción del inglés: Atenea Acevedo

Esta es la imagen de la colonización 

La guerra de las palabras es de uso común dentro del movimiento sionista para justificar el robo de tierras y propiedades y hacerlo parecer como un acto legal. El sionismo juega con las palabras y, en lugar de usar la terminología o los vocablos que revelan los crímenes contra la humanidad de ayer y de hoy que se cometen en su nombre, recurre a eufemismos: para referirse a las viviendas construidas en tierras robadas usa la palabra “asentamientos”, no “colonias”, que es el vocablo correcto. 

Un pueblo autóctono se reproduce de manera natural y enfrenta la necesidad de construir más viviendas en su tierra, la tierra heredada de sus ancestros y a la que con todo derecho se considera propia. Se trata de un proceso natural de asentamiento y crecimiento poblacional en la propia tierra. No sería apropiado, en ningún sentido, referirse a esos asentamientos o poblados como colonias, ya que las colonias son las viviendas de los invasores extranjeros. 

Por su parte, los invasores extranjeros conquistan tierras ajenas con el objetivo de colonizarlas. Para ello esgrimirán cualquier justificación que se les ocurra. Pero el hecho es que levantan casas en tierras invadidas: desplazan al pueblo autóctono y lo reemplazan mediante la importación de su propio pueblo invasor, construyen colonias en tierras robadas a punta de fusil, sembrando el terror, algo que de ninguna manera puede relacionarse con la palabra “asentamientos”. 

Nosotros, la generación que nació y creció en Palestina, nuestra tierra, que vimos las oleadas de judíos sionistas llegar a colonizar nuestro suelo valiéndose de todo medio posible y con el apoyo de la ocupación británica, nunca confundimos las palabras. Siempre nos hemos referido a las viviendas que ahí levantaron y levantan como colonias (musta3marat en árabe) y nunca escuchamos a nadie ni se nos ocurrió, desde luego, llamarlas “asentamientos” (mustawtanat en árabe), término de uso popular hoy en día. 

La Première guerre mondiale des mots

Kissa OnLine  – Allo Om Ali….ici Avital Leibowitz… 

En commentant mon article à propos de B.H. Levy*(BHL) un lecteur du blog, qui signe TAXE, a dit que ce dernier a déclaré dans une émission télé française que l’armée israélienne était « …hautement morale… c’est la seule armée du monde qui, avant d’attaquer un quartier, demande par téléphone  aux habitants de quitter les lieux… »

Ceci est, pour BHL, quelque chose de quasiment rare et un grand signe de civilisation.

Et dire que les lecteurs du blog me prient souvent de ne plus dire des grossièretés.

Qui peut croire à ce discours, si ce n’est quelques rigolos qui continuent à affirmer que l’armée sioniste ne fait que défendre ses citoyens. Ce truc, énorme à avaler  m’a emmené à concevoir ce petit scenario que je vous livre sous forme de découpage technique.

Séquence 1   intérieur/jour

A l’intérieur d’une chambre, dans une maison à Hay Ezzaytoune à Gaza. On entend à l’extérieur des explosions. Un téléphone sonne. On voit venir d’une porte à droite une femme, Om Ali, elle prend le téléphone. On passe d’un plan moyen à un plan rapproché poitrine. Quelqu’un parle en voix off. Om Ali dit :

- Qui est à l’appareil ?…

- bonjour Om Ali…comment va Ali et Abou Ali…ici miss Khamass…Avital Leibowitz…je vous parle au nom de l’armée israélienne…

- Abi…comment ?…

- Avital Leibowitz…miss Khamass…

- miss…quoi…

- miss Khamass…écoutez …nous avons quelques bombes au phosphore à jeter… quelques GBU39 à balancer…ainsi qu’une dizaine de bombes à fragmentation…excusez le désagrément…juste une petite demi-heure…et on aura fini…navrés de vous déranger

- Conasse…fille de pute…

On entend des sifflements…Boom …Badaboum…Zvoom…

La chambre prend feu…Om Ali tombe à terre…beaucoup de poussière…deux pans de murs tombent…le combiné du téléphone  pend presque à terre…on entend :

-Allo Om Ali…vous êtes encore là…ici miss Khamass…Avital Leibowitz…

Avital Leibowitz, porte-parole de l’armée israélienne est surnommée « miss Khamass », car elle utilise le mot « khamass » plusieurs fois par minute au cours de ses déclarations télévisées.

*BHL : néo-con français qui se prétend philosophe. Défenseur acharné du sionisme et d’Israël.

 Sur Tlaxcala ici: http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8881&lg=fr

مستعمرات وليست مستوطنات � حرب الكلما�ت

بقلم: أديب قعوار
 

هذا استعمار وليس استيطان

الصهيونية كانت ولا تزال أكثر من شن حرب الكلمات لتبرير سرقة أرض الغير حتى تبدوا كما لو أنها عمل مبرر وقانوني: لذا فهم يلعبون على الكلمات، وبدلا من استعمال الكلمات والتعابيرالصحيحة وفي امكنتها لتفسير وتبرير أعمالهم، التي تفضح جرائمهم ضد الانسانية التي اقترفوها ولا يزالون، يلجأون إلى استعمال كلمات في غير أمكنتها وللتعبير عن التجمعات السكنية ولغيرها من الاستعمالات التي يقيمونها على أراض مسروقة من أصحابها واهلها, قيستعملون كلمة "مستوطنة" وجمعها "مستوطنات" بدلا من استعمال التعبير الصحيح، اي "مستعمرة" و"مستعمرات". 

الشعوب الأصيلة تزداد عدداً بشكل طبيعي؛ لذا عليها بناء تجمعات سكنية وغيرها جديدة على أراضيها الموروثة، ومملوكة قانونيا، ولذا  ما يقومون به ما هو إلى استيطان وتوسع على أراضيهم التي هي املاك قانونية لهم. وما هذه التجمعات السكنية أو قرى أو بلدات أو مدن أو مستوطنات لا يمكن بأي حال من الأحوال اعتبارها "مستعمرات". 

ومن ناحية ثانية، فإن غاز أجنبي إذا ما اجتاح ارضاً اجنبية بغرض استعمارها وسكنها، يلجأ لتبريرات مختلفة لتبرير العمل اللاقانوني والا شرعي. وعندما يبنون تجمعات سكنية أو لاستعمالات أخرى، ما هو إلا اقتلاع شعبها الأصلي واستبداله باناس مستجلبون ليحلوا في أرضه وبيوته، وما يبنونه بقوة السلاح والارهاب ما هي إلا "مستعمرات" على الأرض المسروقة من أهلها، وبذا لا يمكن اعتبارها مجرد مستوطنات. 

ونحن في هذا المجال لا بد أن هناك نوعين مختلفين من الاستعمار: 1- الاستعمار الاستغلاي، الذي يهدف استغلال أرض وأهل البلد المستعمر، استغلال ارض  وموارد الأرض المستعمرة، واليد العاملة الرخيصة المتوفرة فيها بكثرة. كما أنه بالامكان استعمالها كنقطة انطلاق لاستعمار بلدان اخرى جديدة. ومن الأمثلة على ذلك الهند ومص وغيرها من البلدان. 2- الاستعمار الاستيطاني الاستبدالي، اي استعمار الأرض، طرد أهلها لاستبدالهم بغزاة. ومن الآمثلة على ذلك فلسطين والأمركيتين واستراليا وغيرها. 

ونحن الجيل الذي ولد وشب في أرضنا وطننا، قلسطين، وشاهد الغزو اليهودي الصهيوني الذي كان يحاول استعمار أرضنا بكل والوسائل والسبل المتوفرة لهم بمساعدة الأحتلال البريطاني. كنا نستعمل الكلمات والتعابير الصحيحة وفي أمكنتها للتجمعات السكنية وغيرها من الاستعمالات التي بنيت عليها، كنا دائما نسمي هذا التجمعات "مستعمرات"، ولم نسمع وبالطبع لم نسميها أبدا "مستوطنات"، كما يستعمل هذا التعبير من قبل العدو الغازي ومع الأسف ما ينقله عنهم بعض أبناء شعبنا. 

 آلو أم علي….هنا أفيتال ليبوفيتش 

في تعليق على تدوينتي حول بوق الدعاية *BHL كتب قارئ أمضى تعليقه باسم TAXE ان هذا الزفت صرّح في حصّة تلفزيونية فرنسية ان الجيش الصهيوني ، جيش عالي الأخلاق و هو الوحيد في العالم اللي قبل ما يهجم على حي أو حومة يطلب من أهاليها بالتليفون باش يعلمهم بوجوب إخلاء المكان.

معناها حاجة -انٌما ايه- في المدنيٌة و التحضّر !!!!

و تقولولي يا قصة اون لاين ما عادش تقول الكلام البذئء!

توه على شكون يجد هال الق…؟ ما يكون الا على المغابين اللي يحكو أن الاعتداء على غزّة… مجرد هجوم

و انو صهيون دولة تدافع على مواطنيها

و اخذا بخاطر المغابين المومى اليهم اعلاه الذين يحلمون بزيارة كرياط شمونة. تصورت هالسكاتش بمواصفات تقطيع فني متاع سيناريو :

المشهد داخلي/ نهاري

غرفة في دار في حي الزيتون في غزّة.اصوات انفجارات. يرن التلفون و يعاود. ام علي تجي تجري من باب على اليمين

تشدّ سمّاعة التلفون. "لقطة متوسطة" الى "قريبة من الصدر" وقتللي تتكلم "أم علي" ، يسمع off صوت المخاطب.

- الو،… صباح الخير أم علي، شو حال علي و أبو علي… هنا "miss Khamas" افيتال ليبوفيتش… المتحدثة باسم جيش إسرائيل…

- الو…مين عابيحكي…

- افيتال ليبوفيتش…ميس خماس…

- ميس… مين؟…

- ميس خماس …احنا عنّا شوية قنابل فوسفور…و شوية قنابل gbu39 و شوية انشطارية… حنرميها بعد شوية اعذرونا…ازعجناكم……هي 3 دقائق و انخلص…

- يلعن ك…اختك …يا بنت الشرموطه.. …

- .فززززززز…..بومممممممم…باوووووووو…

تشعل النار تطيح "أم علي" تسقط حيوط الغرفة… و تبقى السماعة تدرجح…

- الو…ام علي…انت ما زلتي عالخط…هنا افيتال ليبوفيتش…

اضافة: avital leibovitz هي المتحدة الرسمية باسم الجيش الصهيوني. و يسميها العديد من المدونين

في أوروبا "ميس خماس" لاستعمالها كلمة "خماس" 10 مرات في الدقيقة.

BHL* : بوق دعاية فرنسي يدعي الفلسفة. من أكبر أذناب الصهيونيٌة في فرنسا. 

http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8880&lg=ar