[ad_1]
By Nicholas V. Barney
Last week, US representative Rashida Tlaib was accused by the Israeli historian Benny Morris of "deploying a deliberately vague language" and relying on "myths of origin" in her description of the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Not only that, but Morris claimed that Tlaib, an American of Palestinian origin, was simply "wrong in her story".
Like all pro-Israel commentators, Morris claims to have a keen ear for the unexplained and the unspoken. On May 10, Tlaib spoke to "Skullduggerypodcast". the consequences of the official United Nations-sanctioned 1948 Israeli foundation, which left the Jewish state with almost all UN resolutions (45.9%), an imminent investigation . crimes against humanity perpetrated by the International Criminal Court, a war in Gaza in 2014 that killed more non-combatant Palestinians and children than soldiers and a displacement of 7.2 million indigenous Palestinians, which represents one third of their refugees in the world.
Tlaib shared the ideas that help her personally to alleviate the suffering and suffering of the United Nations in relation to the Palestinian diaspora and the humanitarian crisis of which she is the descendant. See if your ear is as bright as Morris and the rest of the mainstream media.
Here's what the historian quotes from Tlaib:
"When she remembers the Holocaust, it has a" calming "effect on her to think that" it is my ancestors, Palestinians, who have lost their land and some have lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity; their existence had somehow been wiped out … all with the aim of trying to create a safe haven for the Jews after the Holocaust, after the tragedy and atrocious persecution of Jews around the world at this time. she said, "humiliated by the fact that it was [my Palestinian] ancestors who had to suffer for this to happen. "
Anyone who has an understanding of the story and the never-ending myth of origin of the birth of Israel clearly emerged from the Holocaust knows what Tlaib says. (Not to mention those who have a sense of Christian ethics of suffering dominated by the West and who tends the other hand, preached and practiced incidentally by 20% of Palestinians).
The 70 years of conflict since the Israeli Charter of 1948, the loss of life and dignity of Palestinians through the present times when children (which I hope they do not need clarification "non-combatant") were arrested at the age of 8 by the IDF, and the events of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war that Ilan Pappe, the "new Israeli historian" of Benny Morris, and the late Israeli general Yigal Allon called the "cleansing" of the Palestinian people by Israel (Pappe defines it as "ethnic") – at least all of the suffering, violence and displacement that the Palestinians have suffered and continue to suffer were and are always made "in the name" of creating a safe haven for the Jewish people "after the Holocaust". and the illegal seizure of Palestinian land by Israel after 1967, condemned by the international community, was certainly done in the name of "security", a justification that has never been surpbaded by international legal authorities or the Israeli press . s sometimes very critical of the expansionist policies of his own country.
Only a few lucky ones seemed to understand the meaning of Tlaib's statement. Morris is not a part of it. Although, when working in a chamber where the theft of illegal land, detentions of civilians without a warrant and without charge, and a Palestinian killed on average by the Israel Defense Forces every three days do not count among the sufferings, it is no wonder that Tlaib's statement was mutilated.
The inference of Morris and the rest of the media who have chosen to consider, with certainty, Tlaib's clear statement as a Rorschach test of their own prejudices against Palestinians lacking in social studies, is that Tlaib claims that her Native ancestors were sacrificed. and "wiped out" their own lives in the midst of the Holocaust to create a safe haven for Jewish refugees. Although many news websites have published such a title, this inference is not obvious, has never been an "origin myth" of the founding of Israel and has required a rather astonishing effort to arrive personally to this conclusion.
To achieve this, you must suspend some critical and reductive questions: to whom should the Palestinians have been killed to make room for Jewish refugees? Their British colonial lords who ran them at the time and turned their own Anglo back against Jewish immigrants in the 30s and 40s? Also, why?
Does Tlaib refer to collective suicide and collective self-flagellation by Palestinians to make room for Jews on the territory? Why should a loss of human dignity accompany such a mbadive and altruistic exodus for the sake of the newly arrived immigrants who, not having sovereignty over their country, the Palestinians could not control the influx of immigrants from anyway? Could Tlaib really be so silly? Or maybe the historian Benny Morris misinterpreted her statement?
It does not matter. As a historian, Morris is quick to grasp his misinterpretation of the missing Tlaib statement in the historical archives. So, he replies with historical vagueness based on the same myth of the Holocaust as Tlaib, then does what Tlaib did not do – his story is completely false:
"… The historical reality was quite different from that described by Tlaib: the Palestinians indirectly and, in a way, directly helped to destroy the European Jewish community".
There is a feeling that in the world of lies about Palestine, myths of whitewashed Israeli origin, and that support for the Jewish state is diminishing among young people and especially young Jews, this lie propagated by Morris desperately wants to attack the most vulnerable, morally retarded.
All Palestinians are guilty of their own occupation, of the wall of separation built with stone hands and the West Bank and for any form of resistance to the conditions of colonization and apartheid (the most popular among them are the nonviolent manifestations of Jim Crow and South African Apartheid), but they are also responsible for the Holocaust.
But the use of "Palestinians" (plural) as opposed to "a Palestinian "(singular) never holds his promise nor justifies its plural form, as the historian Morris says in his article, in its entirety. a Palestinian, Muhammad Haj Amin al-Husseini, who had direct contact and collaboration with the Nazis. (Al-Husseini never returned to Palestine after 1937).
Of course, in the process, Morris fails to mention the former prime minister Yitzhak Shamir's attempt to co-ordinate with the Axis powers during the Second World War, in order to launch attacks and free rein. espionage against the British in Palestine because of their strict immigration policy and their general reluctance to turn around. the sovereignty of an indigenous Arab territory over a minority of European Jewish immigrants.
It is also missing the fact that 60% of all investments in Jewish Palestine from 1933 to 1939 came from Nazi Germany. Both have been extensively documented by historian and Jewish activist Lenni Brenner and appear in Israeli public records. (Are we to consider this as direct or indirect aid to the destruction of European Jewry according to the ill-defined metrics of Morris and the use of the Zionist / Israeli plural?)
To recognize these facts, Morris and the rest of the pro-Israel consensus should, of course, dispense with their own "original myths," treated with great diplomacy by Tlaib in his statement, and acknowledge the past three-and-a-half decades . The Zionist gestation and presence in Palestine began as early as 1898, several decades before the date and the genocidal events declared as the birth of the state.
To know this story is to understand that Palestine did not "emerge" as the only Jewish "refuge" of the Second World War, as Morris would have it, but was the favorite destination of the Zionists' concerted efforts for many years. 'a half-century. settlers, who previously considered Uganda and Madagascar.
The British have long resisted Zionist pressure for a homeland in Palestine. These, like the United States, are somehow denied the guilt of the refusal of Jewish refugees and the guilt of the search of the finger of Morris by the problem posed by the Jewish refugees on a colonial territory the farmers without sovereignty neither self-determination.
Morris rejects the long-held myth that immigration to Palestine was a unanimous decision of European Jews, while the first and probably the strongest persistent resistance to Zionism and the state of Israel has led by Jews and subsequent Israelis who missed prevention. of the state and the conflict by a few generations.
From the Bund Labor Party that fiercely resisted Zionism and persistently argued that Jewish identity existed in the Diaspora throughout the Second World War and its aftermath, with intellectuals like Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappe Yosef Grodzinsky, Thomas A. Kolsky and Yakov M. Rabkin Pro-Palestinian newspapers like Mondoweiss, or the Boycott From Within, a subsidiary of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) led by the few left of the Israeli left.
Ignoring this period does not take into account the Zionist policy of conquering labor, for decades presaging the foundation of Israel, which separated Arabs from workplaces in the Palestinian territories, periodically prevented Jewish entrepreneurs from Palestinian labor and imposed a boycott on Jewish immigrants. Palestinian products. This is a violent boycott story that pro-Israel factions certainly do not want to prevent in their campaign of defamation against the increasingly popular and non-violent movement.
The historical examples lacking Morris's grammar, the historian operates a deft and predictable maneuver between the proper names "Arab" and "Palestinian", a distinction that does not bring about any difference in the United States' common psyche after the September 11th. After the revelations of September 11, we know that all Arabs, despite a strong historical demography of Jews (Mizrahi, Sephardim) and Christians, are Muslim, violent, irrational, undemocratic and, fortunately, we now confirm. Morris they apparently have a very poor understanding of the story.
These are easy-to-play notes, and play them like Morris does. It is in this territory of intense confluence, in which the Arabs are the Palestinians, the Muslims, the Hamas, that most of the discussions on Palestinian human rights take place. So for Morris, Iraqis who tried a pogrom against Jews in Baghdad during the Second World War are then called Palestinians (plural) who "directly" helped destroy European Jewry.
Not content with encroaching on the past of its readers as far as the past is concerned, our historian surpbades himself, generously enlarging his vagueness and deceptive rhetoric in the present. It is not only its shockingly false claim that Hamas is the most "popular Palestinian political faction", or that most Palestinians "hope for the demise of Israel and the appropriation of all of Palestine."
By the time these false accusations begin to emerge, he has already begun to put "Palestine" in quotes as if the nation and the name that refers to it was the ironic statement of an undergraduate student who was trying to create a postmodern fiction. No, Morris sinks in front of the desperate and the dodger in accusing Tlaib of spreading a "fundamental mistake" that there is no parallel between the current "Black American fight against 39, oppression and discrimination "and Palestinian activism.
In a sense, I suppose he's right, because if Palestinians could vote, hold a pbadport, move freely on their territory, ask their attorney to present evidence at the hearing and get a warrant and formal charges by the IDF before being sentenced to indefinite prison terms, often blindfolded during arrest. Most African-American citizens are blindfolded and benefit from some form of these inalienable civil liberties, which Israel has legally agreed to protect by signing the Human Rights Charter of the United States. United Nations. Palestinians still have to call themselves "human" in the sense of the expression often flouted and doubly trampled on the phrase "human rights".
I suppose then that Marc Lamont Hill, whom I heard about a few weeks ago at a sold-out roundtable at UMASS Amherst, was misinformed when he spoke of a "tradition of black fighters for freedom who stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people, "Listing the names of Malcolm X, Cornel West, Alice Walker, Angela Davis, Ethel Minor until the list becomes inaudible under the thunder of applause from a diverse crowd because of their age, religion and ethnicity. Hill's involvement in the Palestinian cause must appear to Morris to be abnormal.
Finally, what about this strange statement, namely that "the Zionist-Palestinian struggle has always been a political (and lately also religious) struggle …", a recent religion? The struggle is obviously religious since Zionism has emerged as the monolithic identity of all Jews on the planet and Palestine as the exclusive homeland of Jews of all nationalities, ethnicities, histories and levels of credulity towards the false history of Talmud.
So, could Morris refer to the comments of Israeli rabbi Eliezer Kashtiel, recently leaked to the Israeli Channel 13? During his speech to Israeli military students at the Sons of David Seminary School, the country's most well-known and expensive military school in a country of forced conscription, Kashtiel said:
"With the help of God, slavery will come again. The non-Jews [Arabs] will want to be our slaves … They must be slaves. They want to be slaves … The people around us have genetic problems. Ask any average Arab where he wants to be. He wants to be under occupation. Why? Because they have genetic problems. Look at their condition. "
(A genetically inferior ethnic group whose slavery is the natural foundation of life Yes, why do black American activists find a kinship with the Palestinian cause?)
Or does Morris refer to Rabbi Giora Radler, also a member of the Sons of David Seminary, who produced the leader of the Israeli Home Home party and former Israeli army chief rabbi Rafi Peretz.
Radler's conference on the Holocaust was recorded and broadcast in the same article by the Israeli channel 13:
"The Holocaust is not about killing Jews. Absurdity. And the fact that it is systematic and ideological makes it more moral than random murder. Humanism, secular culture, this is the true holocaust. The real holocaust is pluralism … The Nazi logic was coherent on the inside. Hitler said that a certain group of society is the cause of all the evils of the world and that it must therefore be exterminated … Hitler was the most righteous. Of course, Hitler was right in every word. His ideology was correct. There is masculinity, which concerns respect and war, and femininity, sweet and moral. The Nazis declared that the Jews were the latter and therefore their enemies. The only mistake was who was on which side.
Benny Morris's attack on Rashida Tlaib is careless and mediocre journalism, which would read more accurately by exchanging a few names, correct and inappropriate. I already did it for you in the title of this article. In the subtitle, "The representative's account of the Arab-Israeli conflict is based on original myths about the birth of Israel", try to replace "representative" with "historian".
For the moment, citations around the title "historian" seem to remain in place until Morris, who sank the Arab-Israeli conflict by accusing Palestinians of guilt in the Holocaust without supporting his affirmations, acknowledges this irresponsible historical mistake. or excuse for the grammar of his article. Moreover, the whole basis of Morris's article is based on a misinterpretation of a simple statement and therefore does not contain what each article needs – one point.
A misinterpretation of a statement is not an opportunity to deliberately dispense your own dangerous representations instead of the absence of an argument. So, what about excuses for wasting the time of his readers?
– Nicholas V. Barney is a writer, journalist and human rights defender in Palestine. After the death of a close friend of the West Bank, Nicholas V. Barney made several trips to Palestine and spent a lot of time living with Palestinian families. He contributed this article to the Palestine Chronicle.
Source link
