Subject:
|
Re: A question of remembrance...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 May 2001 12:31:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1192 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:
> An addendum to my previous posts regarding the Israeli occupation:
>
> Although I have used the term "Palestinian" repeatedly to describe the Arabs
> of that area, I realize that there are certain inaccuracies with the term.
> The root word is "Phillistines," a group of people who were enemies of the
> Jews. Some people believe the Roman historians spitefully named an area
> Phillistia which, through the generations of invaders, changed to Palestine.
I hadn't thought about the etymology, odd! Even odder,
when considering that the inhabitants of Philistia were
Mycenaean Greeks displaced by the Dorian Invasions of c.
800BC. :) I do wonder, then, how much of their genetics
and culture ended up floating around and is still with
us today.
> The "Palestinians" today are no relation to the Phillistines. Palestinians
> are a mixture of peoples but are predominately Semetic like the Jews. And
> Arabs are Semetic. So, it may have been more accurate for me to say Semites
> or Arabs. There was no intent on my part to spread Arab propaganda or hide
> any facts about anyone. I normally prefer the term Arab, but regretfully
> used the term more people were familiar with on this matter.
I think most of us knew what you meant, or intended to
impart, in your use of the term. The very idea of the
nation-state in its European incarnation is a bit "odd"
for the Arab world, inasmuch as it's an imported concept
and virtually always solely attributable to colonialism.
Even when they were interior boundaries of the Ottoman
Empire, today's national boundaries did not have the
character or quite the purpose they do now.
> This is unethical. This is against Judaism, Christianity and Islam. This is
> all part of the Zionist scheme to rid the Holy Land of Christianity and
> Islam. Even Islam recognizes Israel as the rightful home to the Jews and
> Jerusalem as their Holy city, but nowhere is it allowed that innocent men,
> women and children may be murdered in the name of the Almighty. The
> Israelis, like the Nazis, are guilty of genocide. In addition to murdering
> or crippling thousands upon thousands, they have robbed the "Palestinians"
> of their homes, livelihood, dignity and cultural identity.
<nitpick>
"Genocide" is a very incorrect term here. Killing because
of who someone is, their religion, ethnicity, or whatever,
is not genocide unless your plan and intent is to kill them
*all*. I have not seen, nor can I fathom there is, any such
intention on the part of even the staunchest Zionist, just as
I find it impossible to impart the term "genocidal wishes" to
the Arab powers who sought to push Israel out of Palestine. This
is a term we've all become too lax in using, in order to make
a hyperbolic point about mass destruction, death, and impover-
ishment. It diminishes true genocide, e.g., Rwanda, the 1904
Herero death march, the Holocaust, the mass slaughter of Bosnian
Muslims, et cetera. Deir Yassin was a horrific crime, but it
does not itself indicate genocide.
</nitpick>
Oh, yes, and happy V-E day to everyone! ;) Today, 8 May,
marks the actual surrender, IIRC.
> However, I am thankful that a fellow Israeli LUGNETer reminded me that not
> all Israelis are in agreement with the occupation. The younger generation is
> now realizing that they have inherited the murky legacy of their
> grandparents and must answer for those mistakes. Sadly, the younger
> generation of Arabs are growing up with the spectre of occupation and of
> friends, relatives and homes taken by the Israelis. Can they not help but
> rebel? I agree that all the violence needs to stop, that colonialization
> goes no further, that Israel returns occupied lands and that both sides
> agree on either one state with equal representation or two separate
> autonimous states. I retract my remark that the Europeans should go home,
> but certainly the hard core Zionists need to for the good of Israel.
With any luck the hardcore Zionists won't be with us too
much longer--they, like the hard line of so many lands,
pass and moderation becomes possible. It takes brave people
to pave that way, and I'm convinced that many have not done
so for fear of being Michael Collins-ed (look him up) in the
end--that's the price Anwar Sadat paid for pursuing a policy
of engagement that was unpopular at home, and the equivalent
was paid by Yitzhak Rabin and politically by Netanyahu. I can't
agree with some that the PLO is by nature a "terrorist organi-
zation," it started out underground but, like SWAPO and UNITA,
it is now the voice of nationalist moderation and must be heeded
as such. I would hasten to point out that the ANC was also long
considered a "terrorist organization," a classification that is
not ironically handed out by the very powers they oppose.
best
LFB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| An addendum to my previous posts regarding the Israeli occupation: Although I have used the term "Palestinian" repeatedly to describe the Arabs of that area, I realize that there are certain inaccuracies with the term. The root word is (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
197 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
