Kurdish writer talks about Arab hypocrisy. This is a must read
Jules | 19.09.2002 17:32
Saddam's Muslim supporters. Ismail Kamandar, Kurdish Observer, September 13, 02
The Speech of George Bush before the General Assembly September 12, which was mainly dedicated to the behavior of the Iraqi regime and the crimes it has commited in the past and is still commiting, gives a clear picture of America going after Saddam Hussein.
In response to this, the moderate King Abdullah warns President Bush not to remove the dictator Saddam Hussein, because it will open a pandora's box. "His Majesty is dead right. If Saddam was replaced by a federated democracy, then these Arab kings, Emirs, and corrupt undemocratic goverments, together with there state controlled media will be thrown into the ashes of history.
The fact that the Arabs are now more vociferous in there opposition to Bush's plan to attack Iraq, is because they want Saddam Hussein to remain in power. There are happy with dictators because they themselves are dictators like Saddam. They are afraid that any regime change which is sponsored by the U.S and Britain, will inevitably lead to a stable Iraqi democratic regime, exactly as America did with Japan after WW2. The Arab rulers do not want this to happen, especially the billionaire Sheikh rulers. Given the autocratic, dictatorial and often fascist and anti democratic nature all of Arab regimes, that are afraid of the domino effect, which will be triggered by the democratic regime change in Iraq.
Astonishingly almost all Arab media - from TV to press to websites - are variously owned by Arab dictators, desports, medieval Kings/ Sheikhs or corrupt undemocratic goverments. They feed there populations with half truths and upsurd conspiracy theories, like the Jews were behind the World Trade Center bombing on Sep 11th, or the Jews were behind the Egyptian plane crash in Oct 1999
How often have we heard Arafat and other Arab leaders complain, that the few million Palestinians are the only nation without a country, blithely ignoring the 30 million Kurds who've been for the last century wanting there own homeland. The Palestinians were offered a state by Barak with Jerusalem as there Capital. Barak offered the Palestinians a state, something no Arab country ever did. Arafat responds to this offer, by starting a terrorist war against civilians. Since the war Arafat started in September 2000, 2000 Palestinians have been killed and 650 Israelis killed. But in Halabja Kurdistan, 5000 Kurds were gassed to death within 5 minutes - A Shocking crime by Iraq.
In Saddam's Anfal mass killing against the Kurds, 5000 villages were destroyed and 200,000 Kurdish civilians were murdered. The Whole Kurdish area was turned into shrines of mass graves, which stands as a witness to one the most horrific acts in human history. What was the Arab and Islamic world's reaction to this? Silence! Not a word of protest! These same hypocrits who whine about the Palestinians, were no where to be found, when Saddam gassed the Kurds.
The present American leadership and Saddam Hussein are in agreement over two things. They are both against a Kurdish state and both favor a Palestinian state.
If George Orwell were alive, I supposed he would have told the Hapless Kurds, "The Palestinians are more equal then you. So what is the trick? How could we Kurds become more equal like the Palestinians Should we start blowing up pizzeria's, disco's, school buses and Passover observations to gain world attention. Thank God, the Kurds haven't taken this route. And personally, I pray they never chose the route of deliberately killing civilians. The Palestinians could have a state tommorow if they stop killing Israeli civilians. When did Iraq, Turkey or Iran ever offer the Kurds a state? Never.
Most people know about the Kurdish oppression in Turkey and Iraq, but people dont know about the Kurds in Syria.
Over 2 million Kurds have lived for centuries in Syria. The Kurds of Syria compose 8 to 14 percent of Syria's population. The Kurds of Syria are subjected to horrible oppression by the Assad regime. The Kurds are not allowed to be citizens and there barred from traveling outside of Syria. In a 1996 report, Human Rights Watch said that Syria had a policy in Northwestern Syria, to identify people who were not Arabs. The group is divided into 175,000 people, classified as "foreigners" and 75,000 termed maktoumeen, meaning "unregistered." The former are issued red identity documents, which prevent them from owning land, practicing certain professions, receiving food subsidies, being admitted to public hospitals, or having legally recognized marriages to Syrian citizens. The latter are issued no documents at all. Maktoumeen are the children (grandchildren, etc.) of "foreigners," including foreigners who marry women who are Syrian citizens. Their ethnic identity is denied and there has been an ongoing Arabization campaign of Kurdish areas within Syria, in which Kurdish families are expelled from there land and Arab families are given this land. If your saying this sounds like Aparthied, your right" Yet where is the Islamic world's outrage over this! It is tragic that the people of the world have not been more aware of the situation in all portions of Kurdistan, and of the ordeal suffered by the Kurdish people, as well as the steps of progress for Kurdish culture taken in spite of all this oppression.
The Speech of George Bush before the General Assembly September 12, which was mainly dedicated to the behavior of the Iraqi regime and the crimes it has commited in the past and is still commiting, gives a clear picture of America going after Saddam Hussein.
In response to this, the moderate King Abdullah warns President Bush not to remove the dictator Saddam Hussein, because it will open a pandora's box. "His Majesty is dead right. If Saddam was replaced by a federated democracy, then these Arab kings, Emirs, and corrupt undemocratic goverments, together with there state controlled media will be thrown into the ashes of history.
The fact that the Arabs are now more vociferous in there opposition to Bush's plan to attack Iraq, is because they want Saddam Hussein to remain in power. There are happy with dictators because they themselves are dictators like Saddam. They are afraid that any regime change which is sponsored by the U.S and Britain, will inevitably lead to a stable Iraqi democratic regime, exactly as America did with Japan after WW2. The Arab rulers do not want this to happen, especially the billionaire Sheikh rulers. Given the autocratic, dictatorial and often fascist and anti democratic nature all of Arab regimes, that are afraid of the domino effect, which will be triggered by the democratic regime change in Iraq.
Astonishingly almost all Arab media - from TV to press to websites - are variously owned by Arab dictators, desports, medieval Kings/ Sheikhs or corrupt undemocratic goverments. They feed there populations with half truths and upsurd conspiracy theories, like the Jews were behind the World Trade Center bombing on Sep 11th, or the Jews were behind the Egyptian plane crash in Oct 1999
How often have we heard Arafat and other Arab leaders complain, that the few million Palestinians are the only nation without a country, blithely ignoring the 30 million Kurds who've been for the last century wanting there own homeland. The Palestinians were offered a state by Barak with Jerusalem as there Capital. Barak offered the Palestinians a state, something no Arab country ever did. Arafat responds to this offer, by starting a terrorist war against civilians. Since the war Arafat started in September 2000, 2000 Palestinians have been killed and 650 Israelis killed. But in Halabja Kurdistan, 5000 Kurds were gassed to death within 5 minutes - A Shocking crime by Iraq.
In Saddam's Anfal mass killing against the Kurds, 5000 villages were destroyed and 200,000 Kurdish civilians were murdered. The Whole Kurdish area was turned into shrines of mass graves, which stands as a witness to one the most horrific acts in human history. What was the Arab and Islamic world's reaction to this? Silence! Not a word of protest! These same hypocrits who whine about the Palestinians, were no where to be found, when Saddam gassed the Kurds.
The present American leadership and Saddam Hussein are in agreement over two things. They are both against a Kurdish state and both favor a Palestinian state.
If George Orwell were alive, I supposed he would have told the Hapless Kurds, "The Palestinians are more equal then you. So what is the trick? How could we Kurds become more equal like the Palestinians Should we start blowing up pizzeria's, disco's, school buses and Passover observations to gain world attention. Thank God, the Kurds haven't taken this route. And personally, I pray they never chose the route of deliberately killing civilians. The Palestinians could have a state tommorow if they stop killing Israeli civilians. When did Iraq, Turkey or Iran ever offer the Kurds a state? Never.
Most people know about the Kurdish oppression in Turkey and Iraq, but people dont know about the Kurds in Syria.
Over 2 million Kurds have lived for centuries in Syria. The Kurds of Syria compose 8 to 14 percent of Syria's population. The Kurds of Syria are subjected to horrible oppression by the Assad regime. The Kurds are not allowed to be citizens and there barred from traveling outside of Syria. In a 1996 report, Human Rights Watch said that Syria had a policy in Northwestern Syria, to identify people who were not Arabs. The group is divided into 175,000 people, classified as "foreigners" and 75,000 termed maktoumeen, meaning "unregistered." The former are issued red identity documents, which prevent them from owning land, practicing certain professions, receiving food subsidies, being admitted to public hospitals, or having legally recognized marriages to Syrian citizens. The latter are issued no documents at all. Maktoumeen are the children (grandchildren, etc.) of "foreigners," including foreigners who marry women who are Syrian citizens. Their ethnic identity is denied and there has been an ongoing Arabization campaign of Kurdish areas within Syria, in which Kurdish families are expelled from there land and Arab families are given this land. If your saying this sounds like Aparthied, your right" Yet where is the Islamic world's outrage over this! It is tragic that the people of the world have not been more aware of the situation in all portions of Kurdistan, and of the ordeal suffered by the Kurdish people, as well as the steps of progress for Kurdish culture taken in spite of all this oppression.
Jules
e-mail:
UK_Policy@yahoo.com
Comments
Hide the following 7 comments
Great article
19.09.2002 18:00
Kani
Deluded fool or just bad propaganda?
19.09.2002 19:24
Remember Kuwait's "liberation"? How we heard noble sentiments about freedom prevailing? Well, it was liberated for the feudal dictatorship that immediately resumed, and still retains, power.
Or Afghanistan? Liberated on behalf of a bunch of gang-raping, heroin dealing, psychopathic war lords "led" by US puppet Hamid Kharzai.
And who put many of the Arab dictators in power, including Saddam Hussein? Why, it was good old Uncle Sam, whose new best friend is the military dictator of nuclear armed Pakistan, currently organising "elections" which make Mugabe's fiddling look like kids stuff.
Real democracy is the last thing the US want in the Middle East. People might choose to keep more of the benefits of their natural resources, something that wouldn't suit the interests of the oil company mafia running the White House.
That's been the principle motive for the overthrow of numerous democratic governments and the installing of brutal dictatorships by the US.
US committment to "democracy" was ludicrously exposed in George Bush's speech about the Palestinians - who already have an elected leader - requiring them to elect a leader of whom the US approves!
Sadly, there's no reason whatsoever to think Iraq will be any different.
The author also exclaims how almost all of the Arab media is owned/controlled by the dictators, which is broadly true. He omits to mention that the one really independent Arab media outlet - al Jazeera- was pressured by the US to censor it's broadcasts, and when that failed they bombed its Kabul office, AFTER the fall of the Taliban.
Also overlooked is the indisputable fact that at the height of Saddam's atrocities i.e. mass murder of Kurds with chemical weapons, the US were supporting him. That may explain why much of the Arab media ignored that outrage, together with the obedient American media.
The Kurds and Iraqi's surely deserve justice, but spouting the above nonesense, together with the kind of 2+2=5 Orwellian history favoured by Israel's fanatic supporters is surely not the way to get it.
Auntie Beeb
Tell me lies about Palestine
19.09.2002 19:27
______________________________
Everyone knows that across the middle east a series of brutal dictatorships work hand in hand with the West to repress there own people.
But how the hell are the arab regimes supposed to offer the Palestinians a state? It is Israel who is occupuying the majority of arab land.
I find it really offensive to hear the lie constantly repeated of "Ehud Barak's generous offer", and the Palestinians rejecting it and turning to terrorism
As an activist from the Israeli Committee against House Demolitions expressed it to me - "Ehud Barak's generous offer. . .turns Palestine into a prison".
One of the best articles revealing the sham of Barak's offer can be found on the website of GUSH SHALOM (the Israeli Peace Bloc).
The state proposed by Ehud Barak was like no other state in the world (it has been compared quite fruitfully to Apartheid South Africa's policy of creating Bantustans).
All borders controlled by Israel - Divide up Palestine into little separate areas not linked to each other - Last sections of roads still controlled by Israel - Water resources still controlled by Israel - Israeli Army allowed to go into Palestinian territory whenever it likes.
It also fell way short of implementing even UN Resolution 242 (calling for complete withdrawal from the West Bank & Gaza strip), let alone 194 (Right of Return for Refugees).
The worse aspect of the "Peace" process was that Arafat fell for it, and instead of holding out for an independent, sovreign state, let the Israeli's fob him of with something akin to a Welsh Assembly and limited devolution.
ANTONIUS CLIFFUS JNR.
Antonius
19.09.2002 23:37
Dov
Arafat
19.09.2002 23:41
Arafat wants to maintain the conflict, because he's getting rich off it. By having conflict, the Muslim countries are giving him millions. I'll put it like this. If Arafat agreed to a final peace deal. How much money you think the Islamic countries would give him? Zero. The other reason Arafat wants to maintain the conflict. He's needs a confict to divert attention to his one man corrupt rule.
Do you know, hackers hacked into Arafats account. They found out he was worth 3 to 5 billion dollars. Arafat was using different names in these accounts, so no one knows he's worth all this money. What I found amazing. Arafat is worth 3 to 5 billion and he hasn't given a cent of that money to help his people. Its the old story with Arab dictators. There rich, while they keep there people poor. Check out this story.
Having a conflict is far more useful to Arafat than its solution will ever be. I'll put it like this, say your a poor person in the West Bank and you find out, Arafat is worth 3 billion and hasn't given a cent of that money to his people. What would you think knowing this.
Now if you want to know the real Arafat.
I saw an interview with a Ex Russian KGB General Oleg Kalugin on Fox News. He used to be an ally of Arafat in the 70s and 80s. He said, when Russia found out, that Arafat wanted to overthrow King Hussein's goverment in 1970. The Russian general warned Arafat against this. He told Arafat, if you do this, there will be a bloodbath, because America will supply King Hussein with massive amounts of weapons. Arafat told him, in one week, we will overthrow Hussein's goverment. We all know what happened. Hussein did respond with massive force. 20,000 Arabs were killed, all because of one person. Yasser Arafat.
What I found interesting. King Hussein actually wanted to put Arafat in his goverment. This was a month before Arafat tried to overthrow Hussein's goverment. Arafat said no, then tried to overthrow Hussein's goverment. After this happened, King Hussein described Arafat, as a man who never comes to a bridge he can't double cross. This is exactly what Arafat did to Barak after Camp David.
PALESTINIANS: PEACE AGREEMENT WITH ISRAEL WILL BE NOTHING MORE THAN TEMPORARY TRUCE
On the same day that the Oslo accords were signed on the White House lawn in September 1993, Arafat appeared on Jordanian Television to explain that he regards the accords as merely the first phase of the PLO's 1974 Strategy of Phases.
"In the heat of the intifada, shortly before his death, [Feisal Husseini, a top Palestinian leader and Yassir Arafat's cousin] expressed his true feelings in an interview with an Egyptian newspaper. Husseini said: "We must distinguish the strategies and long-term goals from the political-phased goals which we are compelled to accept due to international pressures." But the "ultimate goal is the liberation of all historic Palestine." Explicitly he said: "Oslo had to be viewed as a Trojan horse. Husseini said, Israel will not exist in 20 years.
In an interview with Egyptian Orbit TV on April 15 2000, Arafat was asked about his decision to sign the Oslo accords. He replied:
"The Oslo accord was a preface for the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian Authority will be a preface for the Palestinian state which, in its turn, will be a preface for the liberation for all of historic Palestine.
The chief of Yasir Arafat's Palestinian Authority Police has compared the Wye Accord to a 7th-century peace treaty that Mohammed, the founder of Islam, signed with an enemy tribe and then later tore up.
Speaking on official Palestinian Authority Television on October 30, 2000, PA Police Chief Col. Ghazi Jabali said:
"We wish to build an independent state and to build our nation -- even the Prophet Mohammed, may peace be upon him, accepted the Khudaibiya agreement, which contained unjust conditions."
Jabali was referring to the 10-year peace agreement signed by Mohammed with the tribe of Koreish. After two years, Mohammed's military position improved, and he then tore up the agreement and slaughtered the Koreshie people.
Morton A. Klein, National President of the Zionist Organization of America, said:
"When Arafat and his senior aides compare the Oslo or Wye Accords to the temporary truce signed by Mohammed, they are telling the Palestinian Arabs that they don't want peace, but continue to want the destruction of Israel. This makes a mockery of all of Arafat's agreements with Israel, and the Clinton administration, as the sponsor of the Israel-PA agreements, should publicly condemn Jabali's statement and demanded that Arafat immediately condemn it, as well."
On numerous previous occasions, both Arafat and other senior PA officials have assured Arab audiences that their treaties with Israel are only temporary truces rather than genuine, permanent peace agreements, citing as precedents the Khudaibiya agreement, the accord signed by Salah a-Din with the Crusaders, and the PLO's 1974 "Strategy of Phases."
The "Strategy of Phases" was adopted by the PLO's National Council at its session in Cairo during June 1-8, 1974. Prior to the 1974 meeting, the PLO's position was that it would never accept anything but the immediate destruction of Israel. At the 1974 meeting, the PLO decided to seek Israel's destruction in phases, by first establishing a small PLO state, then later seeking to conquer the rest of Israel. Point #2 of its 10-point 1974 platform declared that the PLO should create "a national, independent fighting authority on every part of the Palestinian land to be liberated." Point #8 explains that the "the Palestine national entity, after it comes into existence," will seek "to complete the liberation of the entire Palestinian soil."
In the Palestinian Arab newspaper Al Quds on May 10, 2000.
Larry
e-mail:
Mulligan193@hotmail.com
Reply to my Critics
21.09.2002 19:05
He might like to mention the bombing campaigns carried out by the Israeli secret service in Iraq and other countries. The Israeli's would bomb places to stir up hatred of Jews this was the famous "LAVON AFFAIR" that brought down the Ben-Gurion government.
Finally, why the hell should Palestinians recognise the right of Israel to exist.
Israel is the worlds last colonial-settler state imposed on the Middle East by Western Imperialism: It has NO right to exist.
ANTONIUS CLIFFUS JNR.
kurds
21.09.2002 20:13
He forgot to mention about Kurds in Turkey. The west say nothing about it because Turkey is US client.
Surely turkish people are Muslims but they are not Arabs and even so the slaughter of Kurds is protected with silence asnd complecity. This is a crime against humanity or you think that only Kurds of Iraq are good to mention? Remember only one think the slaughter of Iraq's kurds is not a present crime but older one and US/Britain supported Sadam.
mackno