Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Unknown Occupations

Oslo-Based Palestinian Writer Ahmad Abu Matar, in a televised debate with the former head of the Arab Writers Union, asks a question:

“Ahmad Abu Matar: “My colleague, Dr. ‘Ali ‘Oqla ‘Orsan, said, regarding the question of why we have forgotten Alexandretta, that it is all a question of priorities. To be honest, I do not understand these priorities. Alexandretta was occupied in 1936, and we have forgotten about it, and Al-Ahwaz was occupied in 1925, and we have forgotten about it. Palestine was occupied in 1948 - so what are the priorities? Do you want to liberate the first region to fall, or the last? If you want to start with the last region - go ahead and issue just one statement about the UAE islands occupied by Iran. This proves that there is a defect in the thinking of the anti-normalization committees.”

He is asking why the Palestinian cause is privileged by the Arab world, while other similar cases have been completely forgotten and even discarded from the Arab nationalist agenda?

It is a variation on the question asked by Andre Glucksmann:

“…On the scales of world opinion, some Muslim corpses are light as a feather, and others weigh tonnes. Two measures, two weights…. why do the 200,000 slaughtered Muslims of Darfur not arouse even half a quarter of the fury caused by 200-times fewer dead in Lebanon? Must we deduce that Muslims killed by other Muslims don’t count? This conclusion has its weak spots, because if the Russian Army - Christian, and blessed by their popes - razes the capital of Chechnian Muslims… killing tens of thousands of children in the process, this doesn’t count either. The Security Council does not hold meeting after meeting, and the Organization of Islamic States piously averts its eyes. From that we may conclude that the world is appalled only when Israelis kill a Muslim.

Should we thus presume that the public at large implicitly endorses the ideas that Ahmadinedjad shouts at the top of his lungs? And yet so many of those sceptics who display consternation over bombings in Lebanon seem shocked if you suspect them of anti-Semitism. I want to trust them. We don’t want to imagine that the entire planet is mired in anti-Jewish paranoia! But then the matter becomes even more puzzling. What is the source of this hemiplegia? Why is the world frightened by Israeli bombs alone?”

Here is some information about the two cases:

1. Alexandretta:

There is a deep rooted disagreement between Turkey and Syria over the Hatay Province.

Syrians hold the view that this land was illegally ceded to Turkey by France, the mandatory occupying power of Syria in the late 1930s. Syria still considers it an integral part of its own territory. Syrians call this land Liwa' aliskenderun (Arabic: لواء الاسكندرون‎) rather than the Turkish name of Hatay.

The referendum which was organized in 1939 by the French-backed Republic of Hatay remains a cause of tension in relations between Turkey and Syria. The referendum has been labelled phoney by the journalist Robert Fisk [3]. Official Syrian maps still show Hatay as a part of Syria (e.g. [4]). Historical details of this transfer of land from Syrian sovereignty to Turkish rule are given in "The Alexandretta Dispute" article published in the American Journal of International Law [5].

The French decision to cede the province to Turkey influenced Syrian President Hashim al-Atassi to resign in protest at continued French intervention in Syrian affairs, maintaining that the French were obliged to refuse the annexation under the Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence of 1936. However, under the leadership of Syrian President Bashar al Assad from 2000 onwards there was a lessening of tensions between Turkey and Syria over the Hatay issue. Indeed, in early 2005, when visits from Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Turkish prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan opened a way to discussions between two states, it was claimed that the Syrian government announced it had no claims to sovereignty concerning Hatay any more.[6]. On the other hand there has been no official announcement by the Syrians relinquishing their rights of sovereignty.

Following changes to Turkish land registry legislation in 2003 a large number of properties in Hatay were purchased by Syrian nationals, mostly people who in fact had been residents of Hatay since the 1930s but had retained their Syrian citizenship and were in fact buying the properties that they already occupied. By 2006 the amount of land owned by Syrian nationals in Hatay exceeded the legal limit for foreign ownership of 0.5%, and sale of lands to foreigners was prohibited. [3] (see Foreign purchases of real estate in Turkey for more details}.

There has been a policy of cross border co-operation, on the social and economic level, between Turkey and Syria in the recent years. This allowed related families divided by the winded border to freely visit each other during the festive periods of Christmas and Eid. In December 2007 up to 27,000 Syrians and Turks crossed to border to visit their brethren on the other side. [7][8]

2. The Ahwazi Arab in Iran:

The Governor of Dashte-Azdegan in Khuzestan, a province in southwestern Iran where the majority of inhabitants are indigenous Arabs, declared that this region has the highest incidence of malnutrition among children in comparison to other cities and regions in Iran. [-]

What is the fault of the Ahwazi Arab indigenous people of Khuzestan that their children are being subjected to this hunger and malnutrition? ...

How would the Iranian ruling class in Tehran, which considers itself to be a part of the “Aryan Race” and habitually disrespects the indigenous Arabs of Iran, explains this tragedy? ... Why should the Arab inhabited province of Khuzestan, which produces over 4 million barrels of oil per day, be left backward and hungry, while the Persian provinces of Tehran, Yazd, Isfahan and Fars benefit from all the wealth generated by Ahwazi produced oil?

During the previous regime of the Shah, the name of this part of Khuzestan was changed from the Arabic name of Khafajieh to Dashtmishan. The current regime changed it to Azedegan. Both names were forced on the indigenous Ahwazi Arab inhabitants. Why? To de-Arabise and Persianize the area? Was this done to negate its historical identity?

Past and present Iranian regimens have attempted, but failed, to completely eradicate indigenous Ahwazi Arab identity, is it now the time to starve them to death? so as to force them off their oil-rich land? Is this why there is a new campaign of ethnic cleansing and hatred in Tehran led by individuals such as Mr. Mohsen Rezaie, Varjavand, Bavand, and Mirmehrdad Sanjari, or racist newspapers and websites in Tehran such as Shargh, Baztab and similar racist publications and websites that promote hate and ethnic cleansing against the indigenous Ahwazi Arabs of al-Ahwaz (Khuzestan). Is there an end in sight?

Past and present Iranian regimes have forcefully confiscated the lands of indigenous Arab peasants in Shoush, Dash-Azedagen, Ahwaz and other places, changed their names, degraded, disrespected , humiliated their indigenous Arabs inhabitants, and continuously mock them in their textbooks and publications. Is the ultimate aim total annihilation of over 4.5 million indigenous Ahwazi Arab inhabitants of Southwestern Iran through hunger and malnutrition?

Two facts strike me as I read of these disputed territories.

In the case of Alexandretta, even though Syria still considers it an integral part of its own territory, there has been a policy of cross border co-operation, on the social and economic level, between Turkey and Syria and even a renunciation of claims of sorts. Which means that where there is a will, there a way of coming to grips with territorial losses...

In the case of the Ahwazi Arabs, what strikes most is the total silence in the Arab world, and in the world, about their obviously wretched plight. Why the silence? Why the acceptance of such crimes against the humanity of the Ahwazi Arabs?

Which tells me that there is no will to continue the conflict with Turkey, and there is no will to compassion when it comes to the Ahwazis.

Which tells me that the whole moral outrage whipped up against Israel in its dealings with Palestinians is just a cynical ploy. And this suggests that its success relies on ingrained contempt for the dhimmi Jews. It's the outrage that ensues when age-old social orders are toppled, when the last become first, when the trampled, the despised, the cowering caste of Jews suddenly become sovereign, independent, and implacable in their resolve of never again.

It is the rage experienced by a deeply-racist culture against those whom the culture holds to be inferior.


At 7:47 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

(8) If two parties among the Believers fall into a quarrel, make ye peace between them: but if one of them transgresses beyond bounds against the other, then fight ye (all) against the one that transgresses until it complies with the command of Allah; but if it complies, then make peace between them with justice, and be fair: for Allah loves those who are fair (and just). (9) The Believers are but a single Brotherhood: So make peace and reconciliation between your two (contending) brothers: And fear Allah that ye may receive Mercy.

so.....ahmed abu matter is right that Tv coverage is less on other issues, political movment is less. but that is between muslims in the end. + palestian has al aqsa morque.....the symbole of islamic cultural and miltary and faith decline. its the third holy place in islam.

there are priorites.....only an idiot cant understand why in priorites al aqsa morque is important to muslims(although there is o gold under it). +

so is there neglancanse to the pleas of ahwaz arabs and other many issues the confront the islamic world.....a big yes. is that right,no. but there are priorites.

I agree with ahmed mattar that there is neglacance but why does he raise these issues with the palestenian issue...or is it the art of talking going wrong with him.

so in the end we are agianst israel because we are anti-sematic and raciest....right? ahwaz is a proof and a pakistani brother hit hard by the world of capitalism is also a proof.

At 8:05 PM EDT, Blogger The Contentious Centrist said...

Why, and since when did Al-aqsa become important to Muslims?



At 10:55 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read the first link about the interview in al-jazeera.

mr.murdokhi is right, jerulim is not mentioned in the quran. but what point does he try to make?

I dontknow what point is he tying to make.

so when imam murdokhi says that the quran doesnt mention jeruslim he is trying to deduce a ruling?

first of all...mr.murdokhi is not entiteld to talk about jeruslim bieng not mentioned in the quran because he is not a scholer and all he says is worthless regarding islam.

second, in islam....scholers who study and interpert thing, know that something not mentioned in the quran doesnt mean that its worthless. before the prophet died he mentioned in his farwell sermon from the quran:This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My Grace upon you, and have chosen Islam for you as your religion…”

the religon is incomplete without the sunna of the prophet , his acts and sayings and teachings. 5 prayers a day, for example is not mentioned in the quran, its mentioned in the sunna. so anyone who thinks that the religon of islam is complete with the quran only, or the sunna only, is not right.

and yes mr.murdokhi is right the arabs of the pinninsula were one of the worst people on earth without islam, although they had good trations like hosptality and couage and other deeds, but islam came and cleaned them from those bad things they had.

so ...... what is mr.murdokhi point or daniel pipes point? they should focus on their religon teachings because we muslims have scholers who will tell us and teach us. but they thought that since jeruslim is not mentioned in the quran then thats it.

jeruslim IS important to muslims....for many reasons that i really dont have time to explain.....and i would like to say to mr.murdokhi....when you where slaves in europe muslims where fighting in the first lines in jeruslim!.

in the end i said what i have about the issue of jeruslim not bieng mentioned in the quran...but as two cents.
if they mean that ijeruslim is not a corner stone of islam as jeruslim is to jews.
then yes he is right, because god has made earh a clean place for us to pray anywhere, and with or without any structure we can be muslims and our religon will continue .....and if your religon is depended on jeruslim then thats your problem! but dont say its important to jews and isnt important to muslims, or because it is important to jews its not important to muslims. whats important to muslims is not their field of study and if it was we may ended like you ......... who lost the path.

it the age of the lowlifes talking in the name of religon and people. without having knowledge.

know ........ after debunking this theory that jeruslim is not mentioned in the quran......the other issue is international laws and boundries. this is all "paperwork" like entering a bank and doing the paperwirk, there are people who know how to deal with this. but morally and religously....you are not entitled to anything more than us! an immigrater and a man living in america.


At 11:24 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

as for the second link.
muslims beliee in king david and solomon (we regard them as muslims). and they say there was a tempele.

so why they chose the al aksa mosque and the dome of the rock on that place.

well, maybe because there was nothing above it.
or maybe becuase its a holy place to muslims because the prophet on al buraq travel was there.

so why is it important to jews?
and why their temple was destroyed and diserted for many years

maybe if all people belive in one god and that all religons belong to god they will understand. and thats the purpos of life

untill then........consume they whys till you reach to the clear truth.
or......dig maybe youll find what you lost forever.....

all i know is that the tempele will be more important politicaly than religously....if found?! i dont whant to venture to these area as it is the jews choices.

At 11:24 PM EDT, Blogger The Contentious Centrist said...

"when you where slaves in europe muslims where fighting in the first lines in jeruslim!."

Jews were not slaves in Europe. They were persecuted, massacred, expelled, forcibly converted. Sounds familiar?

You call Jews "slaves" by way of expressing your contempt. And then you come here complaining that Arabs are falsely accused of antisemitism?

The Qur'an accepts the institution of slavery. The Qur'an recognizes the basic inequality between master and slave and the rights of the masters over the slaves. Doesn't it? Doesn't it teach you contempt for slaves, Jews, non-Muslims? All your comments here drip with that type of spite and venom, and yet you regard yourself as a decent man, a good Muslim? Is this what makes a good Muslim? Do you have the golden rule in your faith, the rule that is fundamental to all truly humane religions, namely, don't be a jerk, treat others as you would want them to treat you?

At 11:24 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

*we regard them as prophets

At 11:33 PM EDT, Blogger The Contentious Centrist said...

You regard King David and Solomon as Muslim prophets?

They lived in Israel in 1000 BCE, while Islam was founded in the Hijaz,in 630 CE. Isn't it a bit far-fetched to claim as Muslims two figures who has existed 1400 before Islam came into existence?

Where did your prophet learn about these two figures? And why did he choose them as prophets?

At 11:35 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

know common . what do you whant me to say about him when he speacks about arabs my ancestores in the way he did? i dont insult jews but he insulted and i insulted. thats not the matter.

and what about slavery? yes slavery is part of life. thats the truth. as raping is part of life as bieng poor is part of life. its an economical factor of humen life that its part of humens bad things. like going to the bathroom and killing. its not heaven!

so the quran is not a folk tale or a a good bed time story. its reality and thats why it continued to this day and will continue.

now i dont whant anybody to be a slave but thats life! not because america abolished slavery because of certian thrive in economics then its the why life is. this area cant be disucced with someone rallying in a gay parade or eating pizza hut then getting furious about how slavery is mentioned in the quran and legalized. ofcourse the less slaves the better in the world! i hope so.
and yes we have a religon that tells as to treat people as we wish to be treated it is mentioned in many verses of the quran and hadieth!

but also if you want to have good neighbores than be a good neighbore yourself.

At 11:36 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

not muslim prophets ... i meant prophets only.!
typing mistake

At 3:20 AM EDT, Blogger EscapeVelocity said...

The next person that calls me a kafr is going to get punched in teh face.

At 8:21 AM EDT, Blogger The Contentious Centrist said...

Has anyone, ever, called you to your face a kafir?

At 2:51 PM EDT, Blogger EscapeVelocity said...


At 3:26 AM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

to end up the slavery issue I will say:

in aab litriture, which is basically poems and ods of the desert and oaisis towns. there is deep contempt for slavry. from before islam to after islam people hated the statues of slavery,not slaves themselves.

from arab antique books i read there are two stricking types of poems concerning slavery

1) hating slavery like ...."we are a people that have no middle solutions...either the leadership or the graves.
or in wars raids when tribes take their women and children behind them so they fight till death so they dont become slaves. so either they win or die

and poems like dont by the slave except with the stick in your hand...... a tall peom by almutanibi one of the greatest arab poets.

and there are books of he night life of slaves and how they have no manners...)their women sing to get money and some become gays) actually the singers used to be women slaves then gay slaves beome famous arab singers. so there is a deep contempt for the statue of slavery in arab litruture and how it leads ti degrading of manners of the slave. and i think hating the stature of bieng a slave is only natural!

2) sympathy with great men wh fell to the statue of slavery. and it happend alot in arab history. the poets sympathize how a great man fell to slavery because of debt or war....

so there is a contempt for the statue of slavery and sympathy for the great people who fall into slavery.

my point is that all this shouldnt be related to islam and how islam views slavery andhow slaves should be treated.

although bth the cultural and rilgous forms of slavery my be present at one time.

but know mrs.noga i am sure you look to the issue from the israli conflict ..... not from the real cultural crieteria.

so because arabs hate slavery,which you translate to slaves, they are racist...and they hate israel because they are raciest.

and slavery is angiast humanit because of the emancupaliation,,,,,but is humantarian when america used slaves.


Post a Comment

<< Home