Wednesday, January 27, 2010

It's only human to rage at Israeli crimes

Taken from the Daily Star here

The upcoming trip by an Israeli-Arab member of the Knesset to Auschwitz is the latest chapter in the saga of seeing accusations of anti-Semitism used to smear the Arab and Muslim world. Mohammad Barakeh of the influential party Hadash will make the trek as part of an Israeli parliamentary delegation, which has predictably angered hardline Zionists who reject the idea of an Arab being allowed to participate in an official ceremony at a place with such symbolic meaning for Jews.

When the issue of the Holocaust arises in Arab and Muslim countries, there’s a pretty good chance that misunderstanding will follow. Defenders of Zionism are always quick to point to Palestinian-German contacts during World War II, even though the record shows that the contacts, such as they were, had a miniscule impact of the scheme of things, and were outweighed by the contacts between Zionists and Nazis. Back then, both Palestinians and Zionists had the same enemy – the British Mandate – and were willing to work with anyone to achieve their political goals.

If we leave aside the minority of active Holocaust deniers, we can say Arabs and Muslims view the massacres of Jews with revulsion and horror. But let’s not forget the real world: the organized annihilation of a religious group in Europe has been clouded by the fact that the Jewish victims of a European crime committed in Europe were “rewarded” with a state in a land where this genocide didn’t take place, and at the expense of people who had nothing to do with it.



There’s nothing wrong with actions by Barakeh and others who commemorate the tragedy of the Holocaust. Naturally, they’re criticized in their own communities, for political reasons: why help the Israelis and Jews with such an issue when Palestinians and Arabs are being displaced and oppressed on a daily basis by the Israeli state?

This invariably leads to the difficult-to-handle idea, for some, that there is a difference between Jews, on the one hand, and Zionism and Israel on the other.

In fact, it’s perfectly logical to condemn the Holocaust and anti-Semitism, while relentlessly criticizing the policies of the Israeli state.

Israeli leaders themselves are to blame for the growing difficultly to make the distinction. They occupy land and bomb people, under the aegis of the Star of David. They insist on the Jewishness of the Israeli state. They complain about anti-Semitism being on the rise, but forget salient facts.

The Jews of the 1930s were victims. The Israelis of this decade alone have launched wars against the Palestinian Authority (2002, 2004), Lebanon (2006) and Gaza (2008). And they’re popularly (and incorrectly) seen as being complicit in the 2003 war against Iraq.

People who are angered by this track record aren’t anti-Semites. They’re just reading the news.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Oulak haje ba'a this nonsense about Genocide by Israel. What genocide? Where? how many? 200.000 death in Darfur, 150.000 death Leb civil war, 200.000 death in Iraq under saddam hussein. No one mentioned genocide. Now, because 1200 palestinians are dead as a result of acts of war, you claim Genocide? Ayb ya jama'a

MarxistFromLebanon said...

inta 3ayb ya zaki

first, more died than simply 1200 people.

second, this is part of the context on-going since the 1920s,

third, Israel keeps expanding the settlements in Gaza, West Bank, and East Jerusalem

fourth, the remaining Palestinians with Israeli nationalities are not allowed to identify themselves as Palestinians, banned from any cultural activities, and even are called "Arab Israelis". If anything, that is cultural genocide.

Fifth, with overall 4.2 million refugees dispersed outside Palestine proper, you still don't see it as that?

Sixth, genocide is when one practices extermination on another. Lebanon was a civil war where everyone was shooting on everyone (unless you want to argue with the bullshit theory of palestinians attacked then syrians).

seventh, yes it is a genocide, do your homework. If you are so stupid to keep things in the context of Jan 2009, then you are more stupid than those biblical Christian zionists of the USA instead of taking a look at the big picture.

8th, there was a Palestine and it was eliminated, if that is not the supreme case of genocide, then what is!

MFL

PS: welcome to my blog

Anonymous said...

It is easy to call me stupid, when you are so blind that you do not see the reality. Ya khawaja, tell me why the inhaboitant of Ghajar want to remain Israeli citizens, and do not want to "return" to either Lebanon or Syria... Yalla, as long as you continue to Blame Israel for al your misgivings, and refuse to seee the reality, we are all doomed...

MarxistFromLebanon said...

If you keep things out of context, then, yes, that is plain stupid.

I do not know why you want to exonerate Israel of its war-crimes (against the Lebanese and Palestinian people alike, just three years ago Israel butchered 1400 Lebanese citizen).

As for Khajar, it is originally Syrian. Its inhabitants regard themselves Syrian and preserved their Syrian identity. The people of Khajar expanded under Israeli occupation, and they awaited their fate with the Syrian negotiations.

Now Khajar stretches into three way, Israeli, Lebanese , and Occupied part of Syria (by Israel). If they are so pro-Israel, they would have abandoned their Syrian identity. Furthermore, the only reason is they never advocated themselves joining Lebanon, because they fear that the village will be split into three borders (Lebanese/Syrian/Israeli). That is the only reason why they opposed any change in their status quo. That is why it is taking so long for Israel/Lebanon/UN to agree on the formalities, because that means the occupied Syrian part and Israeli part (well occupied Palestinian part) would be under Israeli rule, the Northern part under Lebanon. If peace talks between Israel and Syria start, that means it will be split three ways. The most logical arguement is, as advocated by the UN, is to internationalize the tiny town, and put it under UN protectorate. In case you need more lessons about such a history, please enjoy this article from the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8485853.stm

Lastly, again, why the attempt to clear Israel's name? And furthermore, why have I doomed you by highlighting fascism in action.

MFL

MarxistFromLebanon said...

If you keep things out of context, then, yes, that is plain stupid.

I do not know why you want to exonerate Israel of its war-crimes (against the Lebanese and Palestinian people alike, just three years ago Israel butchered 1400 Lebanese citizen).

As for Khajar, it is originally Syrian. Its inhabitants regard themselves Syrian and preserved their Syrian identity. The people of Khajar expanded under Israeli occupation, and they awaited their fate with the Syrian negotiations.

Now Khajar stretches into three way, Israeli, Lebanese , and Occupied part of Syria (by Israel). If they are so pro-Israel, they would have abandoned their Syrian identity. Furthermore, the only reason is they never advocated themselves joining Lebanon, because they fear that the village will be split into three borders (Lebanese/Syrian/Israeli). That is the only reason why they opposed any change in their status quo. That is why it is taking so long for Israel/Lebanon/UN to agree on the formalities, because that means the occupied Syrian part and Israeli part (well occupied Palestinian part) would be under Israeli rule, the Northern part under Lebanon. If peace talks between Israel and Syria start, that means it will be split three ways. The most logical arguement is, as advocated by the UN, is to internationalize the tiny town, and put it under UN protectorate. In case you need more lessons about such a history, please enjoy this article from the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8485853.stm

Lastly, again, why the attempt to clear Israel's name? And furthermore, why have I doomed you by highlighting fascism in action.

MFL