Posted by Honigman
Subscribe to our
|Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:40 am Twenty-Two To Zero
|Twenty-Two To Zero...
by Gerald A. Honigman
Alright, someone please explain to me...I can be thick at times. You'll see what I mean shortly...
President Obama gave a speech before the United Nations on September 23, 2010.
He spent a good amount of time dealing with the Arab-Israel situation. Check out this excerpt from that UN presentation before we go any farther...
Now, peace must be made by Israelis and Palestinians, but each of us has a responsibility to do our part as well. Those of us who are friends of Israel must understand that true security for the Jewish state requires an independent Palestine -- one that allows the Palestinian people to live with dignity and opportunity. And those of us who are friends of the Palestinians must understand that the rights of the Palestinian people will be won only through peaceful means -- including genuine reconciliation with a secure Israel.
At first glance, sounds reasonable, right? But, look at these words again...
...true security for the Jewish state requires an independent Palestine -- one that allows the Palestinian people to live with dignity and opportunity.
Do President Obama or the United Nations lecture that Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Libya and other nations in North Africa--lands which Arabs refer to as theirs and theirs only--that security for Arabs there requires that Arabs grant dignity and opportunity to North Africa's true native people, those whom the outside world call "Berbers?"
Some thirty to forty million Kabyle, Amazigh, and other such people pre-date the Arab conquest by millennia. Countless numbers have died over the centuries--and are dying to this very day--resisting their continued subjugation and forced Arabization of their lands.
North Africa's native people are not even allowed to practice their own culture, nor speak their own language. Increasingly, they are being told that they may not even name their children with their own names, but must use Arab ones instead. Those who protest are jailed, murdered, and so forth.
Now, who raises these issues in the United Nations or elsewhere?
Who warns Arabs that for them to have security, they must first grant political, cultural, and basic human rights to tens of millions of North Africa's true natives--and independence, too, if so desired?
The creation of the proposed second, not first, Arab state in the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine (Jordan was created in 1922 on most of the land), which President Obama and the UN demand, will require yet another partition of that Mandate. So, why not a partition in North Africa which gives its true native, non-Arab people control over their own destiny? Unlike Arabs, who already have almost two dozen states by conquering them mostly from others, these people have none.
Take a look at how some Berber spokesmen have described this problem. Here's a Special Dispatch of MEMRI on May 3, 2007 written by Belkacem Lounes of the World Amazigh Congress responding to Libya's Mu'ammar Qaddafi's denial of the very existence of the Amazigh people:
The people of whom you speak...speak their own Amazigh language daily... live their Amazigh identity...What worse offense to elementary rights is there than denying the existence of a people...30 million in North Africa? You menace the Amazigh, warning that whosoever asserts his identity will be a traitor...identical problems in Algeria and Morocco...There is no worse colonialism than internal colonialism--that of the Pan-Arabist claim that seeks to dominate our people. It is surely Arabism--an imperialist ideology that refuses diversity--that constitutes an offense to history and truth...
Or, how about these excerpts and such from the New English Review on January 18, 2008 and reported in North-of-Africa.com on July 3, 2009:
In Algeria, Berbers were forbidden to use their own language, Tamazight...riots erupted, reported in France but ignored elsewhere in the West...America, of course, had been sufficiently subject to ARAMCO (the Arabian American Oil Company) propaganda, a payoff to the Saudis by Big Oil, to allow the latter to produce and market Arab oil. So, ARAMCO's message to America was that there is just an Arab world in this region in which there are no Copts, Armenians, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Turkmen...and, of course, no Berbers and no Jews--they all came to Israel, you see, from Europe for everyone in this region is just Arab.
Where are the special United Nations sessions on these matters? Has anyone ever heard the President or the State Department ever mutter a word about this? Have I missed a New York Times editorial about the plight of this people, or a lecture by the assorted anti-Israel crew in academia?
No...if it's not Israel involved, the silence is deafening, indeed.
Substitute Kurd for Berber and the story is the same--if not much worse--for how Arabs have dealt with another thirty-forty million native, truly stateless people in a region they simply call their own..."purely Arab patrimony," to be exact.
Whether in "purely Arab" Syria or Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Kurds have been murdered and many more maimed, turned into refugees, and the like just in this past half century alone.
Look at the title of Ismet Cherif Vanly's book, The Syrian 'Mein Kampf' Against The Kurds (Amsterdam, 1968)...now, what does this tell you? And long before the Arabs' genocidal Anfal Campaign in Iraq, the slaughter and subjugation was going on there as well.
The murders continue--especially in Syria--where, again, Kurds are denied the most basic of rights.
Who of you, dear readers, know anything of this? Do you ever wonder why this is so, while hearing non-stop about how Arabs are allegedly denied justice because they only have twenty-one states to date?
Iraq is better today because of America's ouster of Saddam Hussein and the Shi'a Arabs' need of the Kurds, for the time being at least, to be a counterweight to Sunni Arabs--who like to blow them both apart.
Who will lecture at the UN demanding dignity and rights for Kurds?
The same, tragic story can be told about tens of millions of other native, non-Arab/pre-Arab peoples in the region as well...Copts in Egypt, black Africans in the Sudan (and elsewhere), native Jews--whom Arabs refer to as kilab yahud (Jew dogs), and so forth. More of those latter Jews from "Arab" lands, by the way, were turned into refugees because of the fighting Arabs started upon the rebirth of Israel in 1948 with a second partition of what was left of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine after Jordan got most of it in 1922 than Arabs who fled the fighting. The world hears lots about the latter, virtually nothing about the former.
The problem with President Obama's speech and the overall approach by the hypocrites in the United Nations to Middle East "peace making" is that they all insist, to one degree or another, that Israel collaborate with this hypocrisy.
In the realm of man, justice is indeed a relative term, rarely if ever absolute. Yet Arabs insist in dealing simply with absolutes...
As we've seen, despite scores of millions of stateless, subjugated, intimidated non-Arab peoples present in those lands, Arabs refer to them simply as purely Arab patrimony--and act to insure that they become so by any and all means necessary.
And that's why, at best, President Obama's speech is delusional.
He joins the world chorus demanding a 22nd state for Arabs, knowing full well that even the alleged moderates of that proposed new state absolutely refuse to recognize Israel as a state of the Jews. Instead, they insist that the 9-15 mile wide sliver of Israel that will be left afterwards consent to allowing itself to being inundated with millions of Arab refugees, who became refugees because of an Arab mindset which allows no one else except themselves rights in the region (and so refused partition), and raised on Jew-hatred for decades.
Thus, Arabs not only expect that Fatahland and/or Hamastan will emerge as their 22nd state, but expect Israel, itself, to consent to becoming their own 23rd as well.
Does it really take Einstein to explain that if there are 21 members of the Arab League (with #22 waiting in the wings with observer status)--in whose lands live scores of millions of non-Arab peoples--that a resurrected state for Jews in a land in which Jews have thousands of years of recorded history, is at least as Jewish (as in Irish, Swedish, English, Polish) as most of those Arab league nations are "Arab?"
You see, for Arabs and their supporters, there is never a win-win solution to any of this.
For them the regional score must always, at the very least, be...
Arabs twenty-two...all others, zero.
***Note: My own new book, http://q4j-middle-east.com, gets into all of this in great depth and detail. It made its debut in academia in Washington, DC at the Association of Scholars of the Middle East and Africa (ASMEA) Conference in October 2009.