| الصراحة راحة's profile~ الصراحة راحة ~BlogListsNetwork |  Tools  Help |
|
|
August 25 Palestinian Embroidery and National ResistanceI've always been interested in traditional Palestinian clothing; especially women's dresses and identifying the area/region that different articles of clothing come from. You can tell by the colors, type of embroidery, and other interesting features (like the shape, or the sleeves) whether the dress is from Yafa or Ramallah etc..For example, dresses from my city, Hebron (al Khalil) are identified by two main telling characterstics: first, the use of black or dark blue as a background, or base color for the dress, and second, very tiny embroidery stitches.
Examples of (fancy) Khalili dresses:
   Notice in two of the pictures the model is wearing a traditional Khalili wedding item: the coin headband, or wuqayat al-darahim.
Anyway, an interesting topic, in my opinion, is looking at what embroidery and national resistance have to do with each other. Be sure to read the last paragraph on Israeli stealing (yes, stealing) aspects of Palestinian cultural and claiming them to be their own culture.
The intifada was to play a major role in the revival of Palestinian costume, as the embroidered costume became a statement of national and social consciousness. In the Occupied Territories the wearing of "traditional" costume began to assume a more overt political function in that by wearing it one declared a social and political affiliation. In the opinion of one 45 year old woman who now helps administer a woman's embroidery cooperative, although young women don't wear a thob on a daily basis, Palestinian women are wearing the thob, in it's new varieties, as a demonstration of national pride: "women of the new generation who are in universities wear thoubs full of embroidery because it is their heritage...even educated people are turning to their heritage" (Price 2000 p.16). This national pride was taken one step further with the creation of a new style of shawal dress specifically designed to the promote the intifada. Made for a limited period in the late 1980s and early 1990s, examples of these intifada style dresses (thought to have originated in Hebron) feature embroidery predominantly in the colours of the banned Palestinian flag, with embroidered nationalist motifs such as the flag and map of Palestine, the Dome of the Rock mosque, guns and grenades or the patterns of the kaffier, all worked into the structure of the qabbeh and the vertical skirt panels. Some even feature a back shinyar panel with nationalist themes. At a time when Palestinian costume had almost completely fragmented as a communication devise, it again at this time assumed an important role as an expression of national identity, of defiance without violence.
At the same time this nationalism played a part in the Palestinian embroidery industry, with cushions incorporating the words ‘Palestine’ and ‘Abu Amar’ in English and Arabic. The inclusion of the word "Palestine" on embroidered items was originally a protest reaction against the use of refugee products being sold in Israel as Israeli handicraft. Embroidered items were clearly marked with tags reading "Israeli handicraft" in English and Hebrew from the mid 1980s onwards. This stopped being done on a large scale after the "Palestine" calligraphy was incorporated into the embroidery design - although the Israelis have always had a bad habit of appropriating Palestinian heritage, whether it be food (as in the infamous "Falafel - Israel's national snack" postcards, showing a falafel with an Israeli flag stuck in it), or traditional costume (the Archive possesses a lovely newspaper photograph showing an American Mayor being greeted by "Miss Israel in traditional dress" - clearly a Bethlehem wedding outfit! We also have a beautiful hat designed by an Australian Jewish artist and acquired at the Jewish Museum's shop in Melbourne, made from a cut up 1940s Sinai bedouin embroidered dress but referred to by museum staff as being made of Israeli embroidery). For further information on cultural appropriation see 'Ammar, Khalid, "Palestinian popular heritage subject to faking" Al Quds 23 March 1995 and Annelies Moors, "Embodying the nation: Maha Saca's post-intifada postcards" Ethnic and Racial Studies v.23 n.5 September 2000.
August 23 Just a Joke?! Maybe.At the Farewell Dinner last term I remember one of the guys from "Allah Made Me Funny" cracking a joke that went somewhat like this:
"Anyone from Palestine here?"
*cheers from the audience, especially our table ;) *
*he looks at us and says:*
" Are you also from Jordan?!"
*only mild laughter from the audience, because hardly anyone gets the joke*
Alright. Faced with this joke, someone like myself can do two things: find it funny, or find it not funny. It really is a choice; and I personally chose not to find it funny.
Uptight? No. I don't need to be told to loosen up, really, because my choice to not find it funny did not come from me being t'eelit dam or anything.
Rather, I chose not to laugh at it because I believe that if the situation is joked about enough, the intensity of its terribleness (!) could be reduced. Does that sound ludicrous? Possibly. But I think there is some truth to what I'm trying to say.
Why I bring this up is because I've noticed here that non-Palestinians, or even Palestinians who are really not familiar with the 'Palestinian situation,' get annoyed when certain kinds of jokes about Palestine are cracked and some Palestinians in the room scowl. I personally don't scowl, but some jokes I simply choose not to laugh at. And that does not mean that I am offended, or that I wish people would stop making such jokes, or that I wish others wouldn't laugh at the jokes. It does mean that I am trying to take a stand, however small, on an issue that I feel a lot of people do not grasp the importance of.
So don't feel like you have to be careful around me. I honestly couldn't care less whether or not you enjoy jokes like that, and laugh at them or crack them yourself. If I find the joke funny, I'll laugh; if not, I won't. However, I would appreciate less of the 'oh come on it's just a joke' or 'you guys are SO uptight' remarks, because that's really not what it's about.
يا مسافر عود
طوّلت علينا غيابك
دبل العنقود
و رمدت عيني عفراقك
....
وين الأيام
طوّل فيها سهرتنا؟
صارت أحلام
نذكرها بدمعتنا
يا ربي عيد
أفراحنا و مباهجنا
بشوف الحبيب
يا قلبي صبرك صبرك
طعم الليمون
عإمه كبر و زهّر
و فِرخ الحسون
من عشه راح و طيّر
عتبة هالبيت
تحكي أنا بتنور
لما الحبيب
يخطو أرضي و يرجعلي
- عبد الفتاح عوينات : يا مسافر عود
*sniff*
(available without the music too)
Algie: DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK PLEASE. ;)
Or you won't be getting anything in the mail from me.
Muwahahahahaha.
August 22 Explaining Israel's Imperialist Agenda
*After note: Sorry the link hadn't been working. Fixed it now. Hope it works inshallah.
August 08 Peeved :(
يلعن طخ طخ
Okay, on to more serious stuff: found this video on YouTube, I think it's been pretty widely circulated: It's short: a theatrical trailer for what every American needs to know about Israel/Palestine. Ps. If you're wondering why I don't just embed the videos into my post with the provided html codes, it's because MSN Spaces, unlike Blogger, does not allow many types of html in blog posts. I'm no expert, but it simply won't work if you try. So that's why I am forced to just give the page link.
August 04 Peace, Propaganda, & the Promised LandAre you an American? If so, I suggest you join all Americans who are waking up to what is being done by their government in their name. Watch this movie. Wherever you're from, whoever you are. It's all worse than you thought. Google Video: Peace, Propaganda, & the Promised Land "Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land provides a striking comparison of U.S. and international media coverage of the crisis in the Middle East, zeroing in on how structural distortions in U.S. coverage have reinforced false perceptions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." And thanks to Samira for linking the video on her blog. June 28 Right of Return vs. Citizenship: Is There Really a Disagreement?!~ Bismillah ~
‘President’* of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas has said that one of his goals as President is to work towards obtaining the right for Palestinians living in other Arab countries to gain citizenship in those countries. This is an old issue; anyone who speaks to a Palestinian living in the UAE, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or any other Arab country will understand that, among other things, Palestinians do not have the right to gain citizenship even if they marry citizens of their country of residence, or the same rights to work, decent wages, decent living conditions, fair taxation, and other rights and liberties that citizens enjoy. In more extreme cases, such as in Lebanon, Palestinian refugees live in camps under horrible, unsanitary conditions; insufficient water, insufficient food, little electricity or heat, narrow paths strewn with garbage (because there is no place to make a dump), and restrictions on entering and leaving the camp to go out into the cities to search for work or purchase anything.
There has been long-standing debate as to whether or not granting Palestinians living in other countries citizenship would diminish their firm belief in their absolute right to return to their homeland, thus diminishing their determination to exercise this right. In other words, would granting citizenship to Palestinian refugees mean they would completely integrate into the society of the host country, and lose their Palestinian identity? Some say yes. Why fight to return to somewhere like Palestine when you enjoy full rights, liberties, and privileges as a citizen of an official country? Even if cultural or ideological integration did not occur, carrying an official citizenship of an official country would ensure that the refugee Palestinian population could no longer be considered refugees by the international community and activist groups, again leading to a diminishing of the larger cause (there is much weight placed on the fact that Israeli occupation of Palestine has lead to one of the largest cases of scattered refugee populations in history). Accepting citizenship, this view holds, means giving up your right to return, no matter how you feel about it.
Others say no. In the first place, the right of return is one so strongly believed in that no matter how far away a Palestinian is from their homeland, and no matter how comfortable their lives in another country are, they would remain defiant in fighting to return to their homeland. Furthermore, these people say, you can oftentimes do a lot more for Palestine when you are protected by citizenship of another country. Examples they cite here are the late Dr. Prof. Edward Said of Colombia University, an American citizen, Dr. Raed Salah, Dr. Azmi Bishara, Mr. Muhammad Baraka, Mr. Ahmad Al Taibi, all Israeli citizens, and more importantly (since we are talking about Arab citizenships) renowned journalists Shafeeq Al Hoot and Sameer Qaseer, and Mr. Muhammad Swaid, President of the Center for Palestinian Studies, all of whom are Lebanese citizens. Clearly, these people have done much more for the Palestinian cause on an intellectual and academic level, as citizens of other countries, than others who hold Palestinian travel documents and identification. This view proposes that accepting citizenship is simply a way to make the lives of refugees more comfortable while the ongoing struggle to exercise the right of return continues.
I personally can cite examples supporting both arguments, but I think that by dividing the issue into these two sides we are creating dissent where there should be none. Both sides agree that Palestinian refugees who carry the status of refugees are being treated inhumanely, especially in Arab countries. Both sides agree that the right of return needs to be upheld. The focus should be on the larger picture: something has to be done to stop the suffering. Is it possible to even hope that Arab countries would grant citizenship to such large numbers of people just like that? Furthermore, personal experience has shown me and many others that Palestinians who carry other citizenships are still treated as second-class citizens in neighboring Arab countries (my experience has been in Jordan, KSA, UAE, and Egypt), since it is usually obvious by things like family name and dialect that you are Palestinian.
My opinion is that a simple solution be implemented; one so simple it probably sounds naïve. There are international laws in place that pertain to the treatment of refugees (refer to the United Nations’ Convention relating to the Status of Refugees**); their rights of association, rights to court access, to non-discrimination, to freedom of religion, to property ownership, to gainful employment, and so on. It is crucial that such laws are implemented such that Palestinian refugees in Arab countries fall under their implementation. These laws would ensure fair and humane treatment of refugees while they live in host countries, and the host countries can then make decisions to grant citizenships on an efficient, consistent, individual, case-by-case basis. To me, what is more important is that people live like people, without the suffering, discrimination, and humiliation that many Palestinian refugees currently live with. Furthermore, Arab countries might be more willing to treat refugees based on these international laws, whereas they are very unwilling to simply grant everyone citizenship and then actually treat them as first-class citizens. Meanwhile, the need to exercise the right to return is still there, and the cause will not be forgotten, identity will not be erased. Additionally, the refugee populations will still be recorded in official statistics as refugees; they will remain one of the biggest, most embarrassing refugee problems of all time, staring the international community in the face.
----- Notes:
* I use quotation marks here because Abbas was ‘elected’ under occupation where two thirds of the Palestinian population did not vote (not to mention those living outside of Palestinian territories), and where it is highly likely that the elections were rigged in one way or another.
** United Nations’ Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees <http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/refugees.htm> June 24 The Demise of Fatih; and What Is Hamas?Asad Abu Khalil wrote an insightful article (here) a while back about Fatih and Hamas after the Palestinian elections; I do not agree with all the arguments he makes. But he raises some important points about the various Palestinian political organizations that have shaped, continue to shape, or attempt to shape the picture of the Palestinian situation. It is a must-read, but do it with a clear mind and critical thinking skills. His own opinions on things sometimes blur with fact; keep that in mind.
Someone eager to criticize Abu Khalil's article might point out that he presents a very much "one man view of history" ; attempting to explain big historical, social, and political situations by focusing on one person, their personality, and their actions. However, it is important to note that when discussing the issue of Palestinian political organizations, one must realize that single individuals play very big roles, and their actions usually end up having enormous, far-reaching consquences for large numbers of people. Therefore, I think Abu Khalil's focus on individuals in his article is very fair.
Some quotes from his article that I find of particular interest:
"Arafat did not want a movement that would institutionalize Palestinian struggle for independence, or to husband their popular resources. Instead, he institutionalized corruption through the PLO and Fatah structures."
"Arafat did not want to create an effective organization; the organizational (or disorganizational) chaos suited him fine. It facilitated his autocratic style of leadership, and camouflaged his secret dealings."
"Arafat also rewarded not effectiveness or competence; only loyalty and submission to his will ... "
In addition, he points out that:
"... there are other factors to explain the demise of Fatah: the class that inherited Fatah had no historical credibility, and they all have a reputation of subservience to US/Israeli interests, and they all are so notoriously corrupt, and so notoriously known for indulgences for luxuries."
And with regards to Bush's foreign policies:
"[T]he fanaticism of this man, coupled with his deep ignorance of world affairs and geography can take him to new extremes. Who knows: Bush, in addition to his record of Islamic governments in Palestine and Iraq, may also have the chance to install an Islamic government in Syria. Maybe with more chances for the Bush's doctrine, we may get to see Islamic governments spread..."
So true.. !! Just remember:
وَقُلْ جَآءَ ٱلْحَقُّ وَزَهَقَ ٱلْبَاطِلُ إِنَّ ٱلْبَاطِلَ كَانَ زَهُوقاً
Surat al Israa, verse 81: "And say: 'Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.' "
Finally:
"That does not mean that I am pessimistic about the future of Palestinian struggle: Zionism created its own enemies, and its own enemies will never cease, no matter how powerful the Israeli state is. The Zionist project will not succeed because it can't succeed, and I am not saying this for emotional reasons. At different levels, the Zionist project has only been imposed by force. You need some consent for success, and there is no iota of consent in Palestinian attitude toward Israel."
Read the article.
May 18 أرض البرتقال الحزينGhassan Kanafani...an author whose books I truly enjoy. The guy was talented, and knew how to convey his talent too. Mashallah. I can read his stories over and over again; Mawt Sareer Raqam 12 (Death of Bed Number 12) is a particular favorite of mine, but I love them all....
This picture reminded me of his book, Land of the Sad Oranges; you can probably see why:
 Photo by George Azar 2005
I've got to get my hands on that book and read the whole thing all over again. For anyone who has not read any of his works, I suggest you do immediately.
Some more pictures of Palestine to increase my nostalgia...
Grapes from my city of Khalil (Hebron in English) - this woman's smile is gorgeous mashallah:
 Famous Khalili honey...beautiful:
 This one is for Hala: Safad:
 For all kunafah lovers :D :
 This is for Mariam, and all the people of Jenin, a monument built from vehicle parts destroyed in one of the Israeli massacres:
 To be continued inshaallah...
Ghazza:
And more Ghazza:
Ramalllah:
And more Ramallah :) :
March 31 Discussion on HamasA recent discussion on our "Justice for Palestine" Facebook group titled "Hamas' Victory"; I thought I would post it on here and see what you all think (I wrote the third entry): Ayah Helmy writes: I was wondering what people's views on Hamas' victory in the elections were. What do you think will happen now? Charlie Thorson wrote at 10:52am March 28th, 2006: Salaam
alaikum. the hamas victory is terrible for the peace process, and
Palestinians and Israelis alike. hamas is a terrorist organization in
every sense of the term. the only reason they conduct any type of
humanitarian aid is to obtain more "martyrs". Hamas has a chance at
redemption for its crimes. It must recognize Israel and crack down on
militant organizations. Ramla likes to point out that Palestinians have
killed than Israelis. My question to her is how many Palestinians have
been intentionally killed by Israelis, and not accidental deaths that
happen in war? I wrote at 11:35pm March 30th, 2006: A
small amount of real research on Hamas would enlighten the researcher
as to what Hamas actually is and does, Charlie. It would be interesting
to know how much real knowledge on Hamas you have. Ignorance coupled
with intense brain washing from the 'Western' media can lead one to
hastily conclude very shaky things about this issue. I wonder: have you
spoken to a Hamas representative recently, or visited their website, or
read any of their literature? If not, I suggest you do, and revise your
claims about them wanting to obtain more martyrs (for starters). I also
would appreciate clarification as to why you think Hamas might feel
that making people die for martyrdom would benefit them as an
organization in any way; this seems irrational to me, and Hamas would
no doubt agree with me.
More clarification please: on your definition of terrorist organization. On your definition of "its crimes". On your reasons for claiming that Hamas is in the position of being required to apologize for "its crimes", after you have explained what those crimes are. On your definition of "militant organizations". On your definition of accidental deaths. On your definition of war. Firas Khamis wrote Shalom Charlie,
at 6:29pm: I can say that I agree with some of what you said. But let's widen the subject to get the whole picture; Hamas is 17 years old, the Israeli occupation to the Palestinian territories is 39 years old, so Hamas is just a complication of the problem; the real problem is the occupation. Hamas is an expression of frustration, but is it a right expression? The image of dead Israeli civilians tells me not. Now about the intentional killing, I see your argument totally misleading, because Israel was born over the dead bodies of Palestinians in their own land. Israel terrorist groups turned Palestinian cities and villages to piles of destructed homes and dead bodies in 1948 to build Israel, please don’t tell me you don’t know that, because it is a fact of history that was proven over and over again. The heads of the Zionist terrorist groups became Israel top officials like Ihuda Barak, and many many others. Don’t tell me that the Jews owned the land two thousand years ago, and they deserve it more than Palestinians because how do you know that Palestinians are not Jews who converted to Islam, do you have a way to prove it? Of course not; then the excuse that Zionists used to kill thousands of Palestinians in 1948 and to make 700 thousands homeless is wrong and unacceptable. I lived in Lebanon and I saw how Israeli planes threw bombs with an unbelievable accuracy to hit many places like a United Nation building where 298 civilians thought they could be safe. I also know that during Israeli elections tens of Palestinians die so that people like Barak, Sharon, Perez and others get elected. Did you count how many Palestinians die few weeks before the last Israeli election, so many. Charlie, trust me, it doesn’t matter who is right, power and only power talks. In the end, just to make it clear, killing is killing is killing is evil regardless of who does it and the powerful rules until he becomes weak and this is inevitable. ---------- I'll keep adding to this if more people comment. And I swear I'll write that post about Islam, Culture, and National Liberation. Wallah. Just as soon as Public Health midterm is over with. Comment Box February 09 Pity , Rambles, and GeologyI find myself looking down on them with pity. I see them as not much more than cowards, backed up by a shockingly large flow of money. Bolstering their current position of strength and superiority is the fact that they are surrounded by a bunch of puppet thieves who like to call themselves leaders of nations. Leaders ranging from Presidents to Prime Ministers to Sheikhs. But all just puppets in the end.
The important thing here is that they are surrounded. Thieving puppet leaders do not live forever. And their replacements do not live forever either. Only justice conquers all, changes all. And that is when being surrounded becomes dangerous.
Guns and tanks can only work for so long. Humans with a will can and do overpower weapons... when children are not afraid, when women are weathered and strong, when men sacrifice life so willingly..it is then that heart, soul, and mind beat bullets.
------------------------------------------------------
Today I have a cold. Have had it for the past three days. And people around me cannot seem to stop eating, which is unfortunate for me since I am fasting for Ashuraa'. Doesn't this society ever stop eating?!
Today I sound like this: cough cough, clear throat, blow nose, croak hoarsely (sp?)
Alhumdulilah though.
By the way, did I mention that I am broke, with no significant source of income? No? Well I am. So if you see me eating anything more than 69 cent Ramen noodles and 25 cent Little Debbie Fudge Rounds, come up to me and reprimand me for not being frugal. It's Ramen and Little Debbie all the way for me, from now on.
Alhumdulilah.
 -------------------------------
And get a load of this: Some scientists are claiming that melted rock produced from the “sudden lurching” of tectonic plates underground helps lubricate faults as they slide past each other. According to these scientists, earthquakes melt rock about 10 kilometers underground, resulting in a glassy layer of stone that rises to the Earth’s surface when mountains form. This glassy layer is called pseudotachylyte, and there is debate over whether the pseudotachylyte actually accelerates quakes, or blocks up the moving fault, preventing more dangerous earthquakes. This article describes studies performed to determine which of the theories is more accurate, with the conclusion that lubrication might occur in some cases, but other mechanisms might be a factor in other quakes.
Source: Unger, Katherine. “Melted Rock Helps Quakes Shake.” ScienceNow Daily News. February 3, 2006. <http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2006/203/2> December 05 On the Gaza "disengagement"This post is long, long, long overdue, but still....
I really wanted to write a comprehensive post on the Gaza disengagement, and I have all these articles lined up to read and compile. However, I lack time, as usual. Take a look at this article, it covers most of the points I would have made. I've gone through and highlighted key words and phrases in red for people who just want to skim the article:
Disengagement? by Phyllis Bennis Institute for Policy Studies ** Israel has a unilateral obligation to withdraw its troops and settlers and end its occupation of Gaza as well as of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. But the Gaza "disengagement" is not designed to, and will not result in an end to occupation. ** The "disengagement" will leave Gazans worse off economically, socially and politically than they are now, isolating the 1.2 million Palestinians in a besieged prison surrounded and controlled on all sides by Israel. ** Sharon's goal is to maximize the chaos and televised scenes of Israeli pain and division, so he can refuse any U.S. or international demands that he withdraw from the West Bank and Jerusalem, claiming that the price Israel is paying is too high to go further. "Gaza first" will become Gaza last. ** The construction of Israel's Wall continues despite the rulings of the International Court of Justice finding it illegal; it will soon be completed, locking West Bank Palestinians into tiny cantons separated from each other and from their own land. ** All Israeli settlements - from tiny "outposts" to the largest settlement cities such as Ma'ale Adumim and Ariel - are illegal, violating the Fourth Geneva Convention's prohibition against moving any population from the occupying country into the occupied territory.
Although the "disengagement" may well result in the withdrawal of all settlers out of Gaza, and the redeployment of all Israeli soldiers to the Gazan borders (though not completely out of Palestinian territory), Gaza will be far from independent. Israel has announced that it retains what it calls the "right" to reoccupy Gaza at any time it sees fit. Further, Gaza is an inseparable part of the Occupied Palestinian Territories; withdrawing from one sector of that land, while the military occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem remains, does not constitute an end to occupation. Sharon has announced that once the settlers and soldiers are out of Gaza (a process which may take months, because of soldiers remaining throughout the process of demolishing settler houses) Israel will no longer have any responsibility towards the people of Gaza. This is a false claim. Under international law, a besieging power has exactly the same obligations as any other occupying power - to provide for the humanitarian needs of the occupied population, including provision of food, health care, education, etc. Whatever Sharon may claim, "disengaging" from Gaza does not constitute an end to occupation. The end of occupation was defined by the post-World War II Nuremberg Tribunal: "The test for application of the legal regime of occupation is not whether the occupying power fails to exercise effective control over the territory, but whether it has the ability to exercise such power." As long as Israel surrounds Gaza, controlling its borders, skies and seas, it "has the ability" to control the territory. Israel's plan for Gaza will turn the Strip into a big prison, surrounded by guards, in which the 1.2 million Palestinian inmates may be allowed to move on their own within the walls but will remain imprisoned. Sharon's real plan for the Gaza "disengagement" is to ensure that the process is visibly as traumatic and difficult as possible for settlers, and that it creates as much division and antagonism as possible within Israeli society. While some settler supporters have been kept out of Gaza, others have already been allowed in to establish themselves at an abandoned hotel at Shirat HaYam. The goal is to make the pull-out so chaotic and emotional that Sharon will be able to win U.S. and international support for his claim that "this process has been so difficult, so divisive, that you simply can't ask us to withdraw any further from any other land." Continuing the "end of occupation" to end the siege of Gaza and to include the West Bank and East Jerusalem will be taken off the agenda altogether. Sharon is already counting on agreement from the Bush administration. In April 2004 Bush sent a letter to Sharon confirming that in any final status agreement, the U.S. would not expect Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders, but would essentially accept the annexation of huge swathes of Palestinian territory by Israel. In that same letter Bush also claimed the right to deny Palestinians their internationally recognized legal right to return to their homes, stating the U.S. commitment that the Palestinian right of return would only be accepted in the new Palestinian state, not inside Israel where their actual homes are. Sharon's adviser Dov Weisglass described the disengagement's goal as "the freezing of the peace process…. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. … All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress." While Bush, following his June 2005 meeting with Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, spoke of the need for both sides to agree before there could be any changes in what he then defined as the "1949 armistice line" (essentially the same as the 1967 border), that was an oral statement made in a press conference, with no follow-up commitment. There is no indication that the exchange of letters with Sharon does not still stand as the letter of the law for the Bush administration. While the U.S. and international press and government pronouncements are focused on the Gaza "disengagement," Israel is continuing to construct its massive Wall on Palestinian territory, seizing land and imprisoning Palestinians in tiny cantons. Despite the July 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, in a case considered at the request of the UN General Assembly, that the Wall is illegal, Israel is rushing construction and will soon have the entire Wall built. The claim that the Wall is designed to protect Israel is false; if that were the case the Wall would be constructed on the Green Line, Israel's 1967 border with the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. Instead, it is being built almost entirely on Palestinian land, surrounding many Palestinian towns and the entire city of Qalquilya (population 50,000), and dividing thousands of Palestinians from their own agricultural lands and fields, preventing people from reaching schools and hospitals, dividing Palestinians from each other. There is a significant danger that the combination of Israel's redeployment from Gaza and the completion of the Wall, will lead to Israel declaring some version of a Palestinian statelet in the bantustan areas enclosed by the Wall, comprising less than half the territory of the West Bank, along with the prison of Gaza and nothing in Jerusalem. Such a move would make Israel's current violations of international law even more serious and make the obligations of international civil society to work to end the occupation even more urgent. So - what do we do? Since governments, especially the U.S. government, have so far been unwilling to take seriously their obligations to hold Israel accountable for its violations of international law, it is up to our global civil society to do it. Both Palestinian civil society organizations and the UN-based International Coordinating Network on Palestine have called for non-violent campaigns of "BDS" - boycotts, divestment and sanctions – against Israel’s occupation and the institutions and corporations that benefit from it The tactical details will differ in different countries and different regions, but the overall goal is the same: to pressure Israel for compliance with international law and to pressure the U.S. to stop supporting Israel's occupation. The U.S. Campaign to End Israeli Occupation (www.endtheoccupation.org) will be considering various projects within this framework. The Presbyterian Church has already taken the lead in urging a campaign of divestment from corporations that support the occupation. There is a lot of work to be done. August 22 Poetry by Mahmoud DarwishHmm...salamaleikum everyone. This post was inspired by Jehanzeb, since he likes poetry and mentioned Mahmoud Darwish in one of his posts ...SO, I present you all with one of my favorite poems by Mahmoud Darwish, and soon to come, my favorites by Nizar Qabbani !
"Identity Card"
P.S. I'll respond to all of your comments on the Wal Mart post soon inshallah. July 14 Updated List of U.S. Vetoes
HAH ! check this out !! Don't worry, it's not a boring article..it's a collection of blunt facts...see for yourself !!!!
----------------------------------------------------------
Washington Report, May/June 2005, page 14 Special Report An Updated List of Vetoes Cast by the United States to Shield Israel from Criticism by the U.N. Security CouncilBy Donald NeffPrior to the Nixon administration, the United States had never employed its veto power in the U.N. Security Council. It was first used March 17, 1970 over Southern Rhodesia. The second U.S. veto came two years later, when Washington sought to protect Israel from a resolution condemning Israel for one of its attacks on its neighbors. Since then, the United States has cast its veto a total of 39 times to shield Israel from Security Council draft resolutions that condemned, deplored, denounced, demanded, affirmed, endorsed, called on and urged Israel to obey the world body.
Donald Neff is author of the Warriors trilogy, Fallen Pillars: U.S. Policy towards Palestine and Israel since 1945, and 50 Years of Israel, all available through the AET Book Club. July 06 Shared Destiny, Shared DefianceShared Destiny, Shared Defiance By: Ramzy Baroud* They say that if you don’t learn from history, you will be condemned to repeat it. This could not be truer when one contrasts the destinies of the Native Americans and the Palestinian people. The determination and defiance of both groups, under dire circumstances, cannot be matched. Likewise, the mistreatment and the commonality in tactics and principals implemented by their invaders seem uncanny. Lets take a brief look into history: Few can be as blunt regarding the legacy of the United States toward the native people of this land as the 26th President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt. In his narrative, "The Winning of the West," Roosevelt spoke about the "spread of the English-speaking peoples over the world's wasted spaces." He wrote: "The European settlers moved into an uninhabited waste...the land is really owned by no one.... The settler ousts no one from the land. The truth is, the Indians never had any real title to the soil." In an interview with the British Sunday Times, on June 15, 1969, former Israeli Prime Minister, Golda Meir made similar claims, stating, "There was no such thing as Palestinians. It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country from them. They did not exist." While Native Americans and Palestinians were the ancient indigenous peoples of their lands, this was of little or no relevance to the foreign settlers. What really mattered was "Manifest Destiny", what really mattered was "Zionism". Roosevelt goes on: "The world would probably not have gone forward at all, had it not been for the displacement or submersion of savage and barbaric peoples as a consequence of the armed settlement in strange lands of the races who hold in their hands the fate of the years." In the mid forties, David Ben-Gurion declared that Israel is adopting a system of "aggressive defense. With every Arab attack we must respond with a decisive blow: the destruction of the place or the expulsion of the residents along with the seizure of the place." Nearly one million Palestinians were expelled from their land after the brutal destruction of 418 villages and towns, and the murder of thousands of Palestinians. They spread in all directions, mostly on foot to clear space for the Chosen People. They settled in refugee camps, concentration camps, which are still in existence until today. Ben-Gurion retired in 1963, four years before Israel invaded the rest of Palestine, the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. It created another tragedy, another dispossession, all with the hope that the state of Israel can become purely Jewish. Israel defied international law that called for the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Instead, it instituted its own law, shortly after its establishment in 1948, issuing the right of return for Jews only. Any one of Jewish race, anywhere in the world was and is still allowed to come to Palestine, granted citizenship, to live free of charge on a land that is not his, in a place where he does not belong. Amid this “civilizing” savagery and land grabbing, both the United States and Israel have managed to convince themselves that the way they treated their victims was in fact humane and civilized. "No other conquering or colonizing nation has ever treated savage owners of the soil with such generosity as has the United States," Roosevelt said. On April 2, 2002, Israel attacked the Jenin refugee camp for nearly two weeks amid complete silence from the international community. For two weeks, hundreds of Israeli tanks, US-apache helicopters and thousands of soldiers brutalized and terrorized the 13,000 inhabitants of the camp living on barely one square kilometer of land. The people of the camp fought as much as homemade explosives, kitchen knives and a few bullets could take them. They fought and refused to give up since they knew that this defeat would be their last. By the end of the invasion, scores of Palestinian bodies were left to decompose in the streets of Jenin as the Israelis refused to allow access to the Red Cross to evacuate the dead. The entire population of the camp was forced to evacuate, and nearly 2,000 homes were destroyed or severely damaged by Israeli army tanks, bulldozers and air bombardment. . This is what an Israeli army bulldozer driver, who is known as "Kurdi Bear" said in his testimony, of what took place in the camp as he narrated to the Israeli newspaper Yidiot Ahronot: "Many people were inside the houses we started to demolish. They would come out of the houses while we where working on them. I found joy with every house that came down, because I knew they didn't mind dying, but they cared for their homes. If you knocked down a house, you bury 40 or 50 people for generations. If I am sorry for anything, it is for not tearing the whole camp down. This is the way I thought in Jenin. I didn't give a damn. If I had been given three weeks, I would have had more fun. That is, if they would let me tear the whole camp down. I have no mercy." Let me refresh your memory with what Roosevelt said about the conduct of his armies. "No other conquering or colonizing nation has ever treated savage owners of the soil with such generosity as has the United States." Roosevelt's words resonated once again by the Israeli army commander, General Didi, who oversaw the historic invasion of Jenin in April 2002. The Israeli army has behaved as "as the most moral army in the world and the most careful army in the world" he said. Please allow me to shift the course of my thoughts to finish with these great words from the 1927 Grand Council of American Indians: "We want freedom from the white man rather than to be integrated. We don't want any part of the establishment, we want to be free to raise our children in our religion, in our ways, to be able to hunt and fish and live in peace. We want to be ourselves. We want to have our heritage, because we are the owners of this land and because we belong here. "The white man says, there is freedom and justice for all. We have had their "freedom and justice," and that is why we have been almost exterminated. We shall not forget this." Similar are the sentiments of Abdelrazik Abu al-Hayjah, the Palestinian Administrator of the Jenin refugee camp, who expressed to me with similar defiance; "If they will destroy the camp many times, the people of Jenin will rebuild it, because with every time the peoples' courage and determination intensify. The more Israel brutalizes Palestinians, the stronger their resistance shall be. Israel cannot resolve its problems by force. They have to understand that Palestinians' quest for freedom cannot be stopped. Its only human nature for people to resist, to regain their freedom. "The people of Jenin do not hate Israelis because their names are different, or because their language is different. Nor do they hate them because they have anything against the Jewish religion, but because they are occupiers, and as long as they are occupiers, the resistance will go on. The Palestinian resistance shall live as long as the occupation lives." * Ramzy Baroud is a veteran Arab-American journalist and the Editor-in-Chief of PalestineChronicle.com. This essay is part of his new book entitled, “A Force to be Reckoned With: Writings on the Second Palestinian Uprising”. June 15 All TrueY'know what? When two days go by without shelling or bombing and people consider it amazing... When every individual has a story to tell of the killing of a loved one by occupiers... When the words blood, revolt, martyrdom, gun, homeland, lost, rose, and tears are sung in songs everyday.. When people rejoice because curfew only lasted three weeks this time... When occupation has become so embodied within the occupied that children sing about it on Eid day*.... Then you know that something is miserably wrong with the world. ------------------------------- * For an example of such singing, listen to this: http://www.i3tesam.com/songs/wma/13/5.wma (and I'll be happy to translate if wanted; just ask).. May 10 Really Cute !!!
Looooool...i just got out of my Geography Final so I'm kind of jittery...like, floating kind of...lol...the multiple choice were very easy alhumdulilah, and the essays, well if I prepared properly then I should have no problem inshallah.... I decided to head down here to the PC lab before heading home, and I wanted to post this on the blog: http://www.i3tesam.com/cats.asp?flag=songs&album_id=14&album_name=العرس%20الفلسطيني It is SO CUTE !! It's supposedly a Palestinian Wedding Story, min 6a' 6a'a lal salam 3alaikum !! hehe ...If you have time listen to it, the accents are really funny (Falla7i accents, farmers) and sooo cute !! Also, the nicest thing about it is that it contains most of the different types of Palestinian singing, ranging from dabke songs to zajal to sahja to Zareef et tool, to zaghareet**. These types of singing can be sung for different occasions (the same tune and often the same chorus for weddings, or for war, or patriotism, or for whatever), and of course, all are sung in Palestinian dialects depending on the town/region that the singers are from and whether they're farmers or city dwellers...so it might be interesting to check out if you're interested and have some background in Palestinian singing..see below for explanations on different songs and samples. If you have any questions, ask the expert *me* . LOL...yallah salams, I'm off to study....*bug tongue*...
Zajal is usually performed by a singer who makes up the song on the spot. The singers (one is zajjal) are professionals in singing and people invite them to sing at weddings. Audience will follow the zajjal with whatever songs he sings. In order to be a zajjal, you have to be a master of language, clever and have a quick-wit sense of humor...in the end, one of the competing singers wins by saying a final, clever verse that knocks the other one off/out... Sample: A zajal begins in that Palestinian Wedding story at 31:29 and goes on until 37:28. Zareef eT-Tool (One of my faaaaaaavvvvvorites !!!) Zareef eT-Tool has a fair popularity and is one of the songs used for dabka. Sample: A Zareef et tool begins at 11:07 and goes on until 12:29. Sahja/Saamir This is a popular song in weddings where people stand in two lines facing each other and sing (very traditional and old style). One line of people sings a verse and the other line repeats the same verse. Sometimes, the second line starts a new verse and changes the order of the flow of the song. It's a show of mastery of language like zajal... Sample: A sahja begins at 22:00 and goes on until 24:55. Zaghareet Zaghareet (one is zaghroot)are the most popular of womens' songs which can be compared to the men's 'ataba. The way a woman sings this form is that she starts with a loud (heey eeeh) or (Aweeeha) sound, then the words follow. When the woman says the last word the rest of the women join with a loud (lololololololeeeeey) sound. Sample: All throughout the Wedding Story...
In addition to other types of singing not mentioned... source: http://www.barghouti.com/folklore/songs/
Hope my efforts at explaining have not been in vain...
May 06 Absence of the Human FormHmm....these dresses by Mary Tuma "make notice of the absence of the human form, and by so doing, provide a metaphor for the status of a people who are known more for the shadow they cast on current events than for their own personalities and culture." (Palestinians) Interesting huh? ...The dresses..are weird...like, freaky in a way..spooky...dunno...they way they're so long and drag on the floor and all..but I guess that was the artist's objective..
|
|
|
