Monday, October 13, 2008

Self determination? Carve up another new State. Back to tribalism!


What would you do if your national group already had almost
two dozen states on over six million square miles of territory,
wanted one more, but another people's sole, tiny, resurrected
state stood in the way?

Please look at the answer through the oft-quoted words
of PLO executive member Zuheir Mohsen, on March 31, 1977,
in the Dutch newspaper Trouw:
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a
Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle
against the state of Israel for our Arab unity.

In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians,
Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.... Only for political
and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence
of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests
demand that we posit the existence of a distinct
'Palestinian people'to oppose Zionism....

Before having to deal with sensitivities of at least some
in the West,Arabs simply gave no thought to Mohsen's tactics.
Native peoples were simply conquered and forcibly Arabized in
the nameof the Arab Nation and the spread of its Dar ul-Islam -
imperialism and colonialism, pure and simple. Millions of
native Egyptian Copts, BlackAfricans, Kurds, Imazighen (Berbers),
Jews and others still suffer the consequences of this murderous
subjugation.In a post-Holocaust age, however, in the struggle
to win over hearts and minds, how could Arabs demand twenty-two
states while denying Jews one?

The answer, as Mohsen stated above - reinvent yourselves.
From now on, you're "Palestinians." Then depend on the ignorance of
most of the world to back your claim, "If Jews have a state, why not
Palestinians?" And don't you know, "Palestinians" are the new formerly
stateless Jews.

Forget the facts. Like the fact that most Arabs never saw the land of the
Jews - Judaea - until their own imperial conquests brought them out of
the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century CE, when they spread out in all

Or the fact that the very name "Palestine" was dubbed over Judaea by
Emperor Hadrian after the Jews' second revolt for freedom. To pour salt
into their wound, he renamed the Jews' land after their historic enemies,
the Philistines, a non-Semitic sea people (i.e., not Arab) from the area
around Crete. Tacitus, Dio Cassius and other Roman historians wrote
about Judaea and Judaeans, not about "Palestine" or "Palestinians."
Check out a favorite, telling quote in Vol. II, Book V, The Works of Tacitus:
Vespasian... succeeded to the command... inflamed his resentment that
the Jews were the only nation that had not yet submitted.... Titus,
appointed by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea...
commanded three legions in Judaea itself.... To these he added the
twelfth from Syria and third and twenty-second from Alexandria....
[Amongst] his allies were bands of Arabs, formidable and harboring
towards Jews the bitter animosity usually subsisting between neighboring

Or the fact that so many Arabs were newcomers to the Mandate of
Palestine after the breakup of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, which had
controlled the land for over four centuries. When UNRWA was set up to
assist Arab refugees (after a half-dozen Arab states invaded a nascent
Israel in 1948 and their attempt backfired), the very word "refugee" had
to be redefined from its prior meaning of "persons normally and
traditionally resident" to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum
of only two years prior to 1948. Hamas' own patron saint, for whom its
terror brigade and rockets are named for, Sheikh Izzadin al-Qassam, was
from Latakia, Syria. And so forth.

Using this same tactic, Serbs have been similarly shafted.
Albania is an independent nation southwest of the former Yugoslavia.
Serbs fought their first major battle for Kosovo against the spread of the
Dar ul-Islam (this time led by Turkish imperialism) in 1389. Albania
became at least nominally converted to Islam via the Ottoman conquest.
Over the centuries, ethnic Albanians encroached upon traditionally
Serbian lands.In the late 20th century, everyone knew that,
with the death of Tito, the artificially glued together state
of Yugoslavia would fall apart. If you're an
Albanian in Serbia and you already have one ethnic Albanian state in
existence (so you can't claim "statelessness"), how do you stake your
claim for additional territory at another people's (the Serbs) expense?
Follow Zuheir Mohsen's advice. Rename yourselves Kosovars and then
get assorted jihadis from the rest of the Arab and Muslim worlds to assist
you - along with NATO. Too much of the conflict over the breakup of
Yugoslavia was deliberately biased against the Serbs. Atrocities occurred
(as they had for centuries), but on both sides, with Serbs often the
victims - victims the American State Department ignored as it sought
Muslims it could point to as championing while America was fighting
others elsewhere. American bombers led the final dismemberment.

Hitler played a somewhat similar game with the large population of
ethnic Germans in Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland. World War II soon
followed, as his sights were set far beyond the Czechs' and Slovaks'

There's a lesson here for Jews, Kurds, Imazighen and others. Instead of
demanding just the rebirth of their one state, Jews need to demand
others as well.For example, Jews have a long history in Morocco -
centuries before Arabs invaded. Over 600,000 Moroccan Jews now live
in Israel, part of the other side of the Middle East refugee problem
few ever talk about. That's more Moroccan Jews than there were Arabs
who got their own nation states in Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, etc.
Additionally, many more Moroccan Jews live in America,
France and elsewhere today, including Morocco.

Why multiple states for Arabs and not for Jews? As early as Roman times,
Judaeans fleeing the Roman wars began to travel inland in North Africa
and forged ties with the Imazighen,especially in the Atlas Mountains.
Across the Atlas Mountains, Queen Dahlia al Kahina (whom the famed
Muslim scholar, Ibn Khaldun, called "the Jewess") led both Jews and
Imazighen in battle against invading Arabs, who would later
massacre and subjugate both peoples.

Why not states for the Atlasians - at least one for Jews
and one for the Imazighen - in North Africa? Why "Palestinians"
and "Kosovars", but not "Atlasians"?

While we're at it, some thirty-five million stateless
Kurds need to jump aboard as well. Kurds predate Arabs in
both "Arab" Syria and Iraq, and in "Turkish" Turkey.
But we all know what happens when Kurds try to assert
their rights there. Their best hope right now is in the place
where they were indeed promised independence after World War I -
in northern Mesopotamia, part of today's Iraq.
If Kurds played the Arab game, trading "Arab" for "Palestinian,"
then how many Kurdish states might they be entitled to?

While I don't really expect that much of the above will happen,
it's worth asking those academics, State Department folks and
other hypocritical practitioners of the double standard: Why not?
The reality, of course, is that all of these peoples are still
struggling to maintain or obtain basic political and human rights
in what Arabs call "purely Arab patrimony."
That others buy into their subjugating mindset is the real travesty.
[MM: it makes sense,- everyone wants to be in a majority situation, in leadership, not under subjugation as a minority. The problem with Arab hegemony is that it is such a cruel, self-serving one.Using religion for political power means denial of human rights to women, for a start,- 50% of their population under the power of another 50%, who are under the power of their rulers,- religious and political, let alone the moneyed classes and their corruption. No wonder death under the pretext of jihad, becomes preferable to life on earth for many under their systems of "independence" and government.]

No comments: