Your Voice in a World where Zionism, Steel, and Fire, have Turned Justice Mute

 

 

The *FREE ARAB VOICE*
September 1, 2000
In this issue of the Free Arab Voice (FAV) we present:
1) Edward Said is More Dangerous than Yasser Arafat, by Ibrahim Alloush
2) Racism towards Arabs in American Films, by Ziad Shaker El Jishi
3) ‘Laylat al Henna’, a poem by Nabila Harb
#####################################################
1) Edward Said is More Dangerous than Yasser Arafat, by Ibrahim Alloush
"I'm the last Jewish intellectual" - Edward Said, Haartz, August 18,
2000.
In the preamble of his interview with Haartz on August 18th, Edward
Said is showered with a whole bunch of compliments for everything, from his
taste in clothing to his taste in culture.  Right from the start, Ari Shavit
of Haartz bestows upon him the title of 'father of
Palestinian nationalism' (since when, why, and by whom?).
But who benefits more and who loses more from making interviews with
Haartz as if that is something normal, and as if these are not the
invaders of our land and the killers of our people?  Is breaking the
psychological barriers between Arab intellectuals and Zionists a good
thing or a bad thing?  Is this the wisest political move at a time when even
those Arab regimes seeking 'peace' with "Israel" are trying to use the
anti-normalization movement in the Arab World as a political card to
strengthen their hand at the negotiating table?
Well, perhaps normalization with Zionists is not so bad if it's meant
to tell "Israelis" that being responsible for the plight of Palestinian
refugees, they should publicly admit such responsibility, right?
But wait! What does the admission of responsibility exactly mean here?
According to Said: "Many Israelis resist this [admission of
responsibility] because they think the consequence would be to leave.
Not at all. As I told you, I'm against that. The last thing I want to
do is to perpetuate this process by which one distortion leads to
another. I have a horror of that. I saw it happen too many times. I
don't want to see more people leave."
"What is needed is a 'bill of particulars' of all our claims against
Israel for the original dispossession and for the occupation that
began in 1967", Edward Said claims. [Notice here how the catch phrase
'dispossession' becomes a substitute for the more accurate 'occupation',
which according to Said applies only to the lands occupied in 1967,
hence implicitly implying that the lands occupied in 1948 are NOT
occupied. The antithesis of occupation is liberation, whereas the
antithesis of dispossession is possession, hence in this context,
compensation.]
And so, the admission of responsibility to Edward Said amounts
to nothing more than a verbal admission of guilt, and perhaps
some cash in the form of compensation, but not much else.
Well, does the admission of responsibility at least mean that
"Israel" would be de-Zionized?
Of course not! According to Said in his interview with Haartz: "I
don't like to use words like that. Because that's obviously a signal
that I'm asking the Zionists to commit harakiri. THEY CAN BE ZIONISTS,
AND THEY CAN ASSERT THEIR JEWISH IDENTITY AND THEIR CONNECTION TO THE
LAND, so long as it doesn't keep the others out so manifestly."
That's just what we need, especially coming from the 'father
of Palestinian nationalism'! The call for Zionists to admit
responsibility for the destruction of Palestinian society suddenly
turns into a Palestinian admission of the alleged right of Zionists
to be Zionists and to assert their connection to the land. This is
of course if we chose to disregard the fact that Said goes farther
than that by admitting the alleged 'need' of Zionists to come to
Palestine.
He says in this regard: "It is an almost sublime conflict. I was
telling [Daniel)] Barenboim the other night, think of this chain of
events: anti-Semitism, THE NEED TO FIND A JEWISH HOMELAND, HERZL'S
ORIGINAL IDEA, which was definitely colonialist, and then the
transformation of that to the socialist ideas of the moshav and the
kibbutz, then THE URGENCY during Hitler's reign, and  people like
Yitzhak Shamir who were really interested in cooperating with Hitler,
then the genocide of the Jews in Europe and the ACTIONS [???????]
against the Palestinians in Palestine of 1948".
Now what about the fact that the establishment of "Israel" and the
'need' to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine began as a British
colonial idea in the first part of the nineteenth century as part of
a plan to dominate the Arab World? What about the fact that the Jews
always found refuge in the Arab and Islamic World from the persecution
in Europe without the 'need' to adopt 'Herzel's original idea'?  Those
historical facts don't seem to fit into Said's political agenda.
Admitting those facts requires a totally different political program
that is incompatible with his call for a bi-national "Israel", in
the "Middle East".
[Of course Daniel Barenboim is the "Israeli" music director with whom
Edward Said and Hanna Nassir of BirZeit University are going to have a
'love-thy-invader' event on the 24th of September in Chicago, with
'Middle Eastern' cuisine, as the invitation says.]
But all that is not enough wisdom from the 'father of Palestinian
nationalism', so feel free to marvel at the quotations below. The
interviewer Ari Shaavit asks Said: "Following this logic, it would
then be necessary to replace the present Israel with a New Israel,
just as the New South Africa replaced the old. Unjust state mechanisms
would have to be dismantled".
So Said responds: "Yes. Correct. Let's say reformed. I am ill at ease
with talk of dismantling. It is apocalyptic language. And I would like
to use words that are as little as possible taken from the context of
apocalypse and miraculous rebirth. This is why I don't say de-Zionize.
It's like waving a red flag in front of an angry bull. I don't see what
purpose it serves. So I prefer to talk about transformation. THE GRADUAL
TRANSFORMATION OF ISRAEL. AS WELL AS THE GRADUAL OPENING OF ALL MIDDLE
EAST COUNTRIES".
A new "Israel", a new "Middle East", etc… Is this right?
Of course, some will argue that Said said all of those things to
'win over' Zionist public opinion to the Palestinian side. If you
belong to this category, please enjoy the following abandonment of
the Palestinian Arab identity straight from Mr. Ed's mouth. Ari
Shaavit says to Said towards the end of the interview: "You sound
very Jewish, ['and very pre-Zionist', according to Benvenisti in
Haartz, August 25]", so Said retorted:
"Of course. I'm the last Jewish intellectual. You
don't know anyone else. All your other Jewish
intellectuals are now suburban squires. From Amos
Oz to all these people here in America. So I'm the
last one. The only true follower of Adorno. Let me
put it this way: I'm a Jewish-Palestinian."
Conclusion: Edward Said and Azmi Bshara are more dangerous than Yasser
Arafat. For Arafat and his school of thought make all their concessions
in the name of 'diplomacy', 'realism', and 'making the most out of the
current balance of power'. That is, theirs are purely [incorrect]
political arguments.  Azmi Bshara and Edward Said, on the other hand,
indoctrinate Palestinians to the ideology of accepting the Zionist
presence in Palestine under different pretexts ranging from the
'bi-national' state to the 'need' of Zionists to be in Palestine.
You won't hear the supporters of Arafat saying that the Zionists have
the right to be in Palestine. You would hear them claim that there is
practically nothing we could do about it, which is defeatist thinking,
but which is also an argument very contingent on the circumstances of
THIS particular point in time. By contrast, the arguments of Edward Said
and Azmi Bshara transcend the present circumstances of Palestinian defeat
to inculcate the acceptance of Zionist settlement in Palestine beyond the
present. Thus, at the same time Edward Said criticizes Arafat for being
corrupt and for being an incompetent negotiator, which of course he is,
Said peddles arguments that penetrate the Palestinian collective psyche
and motivation to liberate, and therein lies his peril for the Palestinian
cause, now and in the future.

If you must ask what the alternative is to the two versions of defeatism
above, I would unequivocally respond: unwavering commitment to the unamended
Palestinian National Charter, the armed struggle, and Arabizing, Islamizing,
and internationalizing the instrument of our liberation.
Ibrahim Alloush
#####################################################
At a time when some practice self-flagellation by trying as hard as possible
to be like 'the other', i.e., the oppressor, Ziad El Jishi in the article
below stands up for who we are.
#####################################################
2) Racism towards Arabs in American Films,
by Ziad Shaker El Jishi
My friend asks me:’ have you seen the movie Three Kings’?
‘No’, I replied briskly.
‘How about the Siege’?
‘No’, I said.
Suspicious, my friend exclaims why.
For one thing, I do not wish to support financially movies that
encourage racism against Arabs.  Two, I can not stomach it very well.
It’s true!   I feel enraged and then I start to loose the contents of my
stomach, so what's the point?!
Last night this conversation took place after I agreed, somewhat
reluctantly, to watch the American movie GI Jane that my friend had
brought over.  It is a movie that went well for me until the very end
when the ugly face of racism towards Arabs reared its head yet one more time
in the scene finale.
The movie is a grueling, somewhat interesting trip with GI Jane through the
ruggedness of the Navy Seals training program  (where 60% of volunteers
quit). The story revolves around woman cadet GI Jane, a political
experiment (later to become a political ploy) to integrate women into the
toughest of programs the US military has to offer.  The viewer is
simultaneously enraged and awed for all the manifestations of anti-women
phobia in the male-dominated military establishment.  But as GI Jane goes
through (and overcomes all that), the viewer is also made to marvel at the
might and top-shelf security of the elite and superior military of the US.
The rage and egoism that is inculcated gradually into the viewer finds
release in the scene finale, only to kill roughly a dozen Arabs in the
Libyan desert.
This is when GI Jane and her comrade Navy Seals are diverted into a
ridiculous "change of plans" mission, as they are thrown into live
combat while cruising the Mediterranean coast, to land uninvited off of
Libyan sovereign territory.
It is customary in Hollywood movies for the actors portraying Arabs to be
"Israeli", or for the scenes to be filmed in Arab settings to be filmed in
"Israel". An example of this is Al Pacino's Insider, with the Hizbullah
main figure being probably "Israeli".   So you can imagine what kind of
stereotyping will be dished out when "Israel" is given decision-making
power on how to portray Arabs!
The accents often insult the Arab viewer's intelligence as different
dialects of Arabic are easily distinguished by ear. For example, someone
who is supposed to be a Lebanese is portrayed by the "Israeli" actor to
speak in a funny Egyptian accent.  Often, an Egyptian accent is placed
in Iraq or Libya. The funny clothes are all jumbled up and have nothing
to do with the country they are supposed to represent. Who cares though?
All "Arabs" are the same anyway, and besides, the American viewer won't
know the difference!
A lot has been written about the racist depiction of Arab characters in
American films. What strikes us, as in those of Arab heritage, is how this
insultingly stupid stereotype has been reinforced time and time again with
images that have not let up since Lawrence of Arabia. The dark moustache,
the ridiculous misplaced turban (7atta), the dark skin, the beard, and the
typical "terrorist" depiction, so familiar today in American (indeed
international) viewers' minds, always ready to depict what an Arab is.
We are never made to question the landing of Navy Seals on a sovereign
country's beaches! Yet alone cruising its territorial waters.  We are not
even allowed to ask what their mission was! It is as if the US Military has
a carte-blanche to attack, kill, occupy, run maneuvers, use as training
grounds, and spy on other countries with impunity, without reservation, or
even regard for their citizens' lives.
All the familiar racist stereotypes are there.  GI Jane's buddies joke with
her: "what would you do if you were in an Arab jail Jane?”.  They all laugh
it out before arrival to their destination.  Although the desert beach is in
perfect condition with moderate Mediterranean temperatures, and the feel of
a breezy perfect beach afternoon, the cadets are constantly pouring water
over their faces to combat the intense Arab desert sun!  Never mind saving
some of that water to drink later if for example you needed to have some
water handy in the desert lost.
The Libyan Arabs are distant. We never decipher their face. They are
faceless, featureless, and un-human.   We only see them through the
Kaleidoscope of Master Commander Chief's rifle. The first close-up
of one of them is when his Arab brain is being scattered to pieces
in the air, shot upon approaching GI Jane by Master Commander Chief.
About a dozen Arabs are killed later in the pursuit through clever
booby-traps, a quickly planned in-situ ambush, and a barrage of Comanche
fighter Jet rocket fire. All this takes place as we cheer on Master
Commander Chief as he gets hit in the leg and is saved in a heroic
selfless Rambo-style rescue in the face of enemy fire by GI Jane.
Never mind about a dozen dead Arabs left behind while trying to protect
their shoreline!  The important point is that the unit "was going-home".
One can't help but to ask here: what were they doing so far away from
home in the first place?
The point is not just that Hollywood has an obligation to respect the
intelligence of its viewers, to move beyond its hunger for profits and
sensationalist shortcut stereotyping. It also needs to be made morally
obliged to answer on this kind of anti-Arab racism that it keeps on
spewing out, and for its responsibility in creating mass-ignorance
and racism in the United States and the rest of the ‘civilized’ world.
It must be made to understand how that affects the lives of Arabs in
the United States, or the Arab World.
The message is beyond "hate Arabs". It is one that asks us collectively
as humans and as a society: should we have entertainment at all cost, or
should entertainment also observe and abide by a standard that morally
answers to society and humanity at large?  It is within our reach to make
that choice and to induce that change.
Ziad El Jishi
#####################################################
My name is Palestine, but all the oppressed of the earth have the same name.
#####################################################
4) Laylat al Henna, a poem by Nabila Harb
(for the traditional night before the wedding when the girls and women
celebrate by painting the bride's hands with henna)
First point of entry:
When his boots Smashed
through my door...
(I REFUSE you!
You will not hear me scream,
You will gather Neither information
nor tears from me)
Bitch, he whispered, And heated up the
wires.
Here he asked the question--
Here and here-And the skin swelled
like ripe fruit
Jealously, he demanded names,
Who?  Who? And who?
Who left the bombs for us
On the road to Damascus?
So I spit out names:
A name for every prick
Searing stars into my flesh.
Here, I said, is Akka,
And here is Haifa.
Put it to me again...
I have hundreds
To give you.
I will not repress
One village,
One tree, one stone...
So come closer with that wire:
See if YOU can draw on me
The map of MY homeland.
'So much for your land.'
(These were his last words.)
Ribs mend, bones knit,
When I wake screaming
The night blankets me again,
And I have learned
How to ride the night mare
>From dark to dawn.
But  now, Israeli,
You will hear my knock at the door.
Still, I refuse both you and yours:
I do not flirt with suffering,
Even yours...
My delivery will be express.
So you see,  Commander,
Israeli romance is not for me:
Your ways will never be my way,
Even as MY land can never be yours.
If I wed death now,
You, Commander,
Will be my witness
At the crossroads
between heaven and hell.
Before you and I part ways,
I swear,
I will henna my hands
With your blood.
By Nabila Harb
February 2000
################################################
################################################
The Free Arab Voice is an alternative newsletter that comes out
only in cyberspace.
For other FAV issues, please visit:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/favPrevIssues.htm
Sign a real right of return petition at:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/A-RealRightOfReturnPetition.htm
Check out a special slide show on Palestine at:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/RememberPalestine.htm
Read the In Response to Defeatist Thought series at:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/InResponseToDefeatistThought0.htm
To read on Arab contributions to civilization, click on:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/arabCivilMain.htm
For Palestinian Poems in English, go to:
http://www.freearabvoice.org/rhythmsOfTheStorm.htm
The Free Arab Voice welcomes your comments, suggestions, and
submissions.  If you do not wish to be on FAV's mailing list,
please indicate as much by writing to us.




  

    

    

    
FAV Editor: Ibrahim Alloush Editor@freearabvoice.org
Co-editors: Nabila Harb Harb@freearabvoice.org
  Muhammad Abu Nasr Nasr@freearabvoice.org
FAV Home Page - > Please click on the logo above, and we'll FAV you there :)