With the emergence of the PLO as a fully-fledged actor on the international scene in the mid-1970s, the Arab host states’ political role as promoters of the refugees’ rights lost a great deal of its significance. The PLO, as the sole legitimate representative, managed to politicise the refugee question by turning it from an individual matter into the collective, national right of the Palestinian people. The UN arguably acknowledged this achievement when the General Assembly reaffirmed within Resolution 3236 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974,
“the inalienable rights of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been uprooted, and calls for their return” (par. 1 b). In the field, however, the emergence of the PLO has, at times, led the host states to tame or fight it (for instance in Jordan 1970-1971) and to tightly control the refugee communities.
The advent of the first Intifada enabled the PLO to establish for good its political pre-eminence on the Palestinian political scene. Cashing in on the severance of Jordan’s administrative links with the West Bank in July 1988 and the Declaration by the Palestinian National Congress of a Palestinian in the Occupied Territories in November 1988, it asserted its stature as a prestate body. Since then, the Arab states have usually publicly supported the PLO’s efforts to end occupation and achieve statehood. They have also called repeatedly for the implementation of Resolution 194 (III), though remaining unclear about the modalities of its implementation.
b. The legal status of the refugees in the host states
Ever since the early 1950s, the Arab League has tried to ensure, through numerous resolutions, that the Palestinian refugees would be given treatment on a par with the citizens of the host states in such socioeconomic fields as employment, residency, education and free movement. In 1965, these various legal instruments were synthesised in one document, the Casablanca Protocol, which was adopted by the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Arab League. The Protocol however admitted that the Palestinians should retain their original nationality as a means of keeping the Palestinian’s right of return alive. With the notable exception of Jordan, whose authorities granted them nationality, the other Arab states have granted refugees special travel documents provided for by the Arab League (Refugee Documents (RDs)).
No Arab state has ever fully or consistently implemented the Protocol. As a matter of fact, the Palestinian refugees have generally been subjected to discriminatory legal statuses.
AND THE WORLD IS SILENT - A HOMEMADE GENOCIDE MidEast Truth Ben Dror Yemini, Ma'ariv correspondent, September 2006
The Arab world is subject to genocide. It's just that it's mostly self-inflicted, and Israel has nothing to do with any of it.
Fact no. 1: Since the establishment of the State of Israel a merciless genocide is being perpetrated against Muslims and/or Arabs.
Fact no. 2: The conflict in the Middle East, between Israel and the Arabs as a whole and against the Palestinians in particular, is regarded as the central conflict in the world today.
Fact no. 3: According to polls carried out in the European Union, Israel holds first place as "Danger to world peace". In Holland, for instance, 74% of the population holds this view. Not Iran. North Korea. Israel.
Connecting between these findings creates one of the biggest deceptions of modern times: Israel is regarded as the country responsible for every calamity, misfortune and hardship. It is a danger to world peace, not just to the Arab or Muslim world.
HOW THE DECEPTION WORKS
The finger is pointed cleverly. It's difficult to blame Israel for the genocide in Sudan or for the civil war in Algeria. How is it done? Dozens of publications, articles, books, periodicals and websites are dedicated to one purpose only: Turning Israel into a state that ceaselessly perpetrates war crimes. In Jakarta and in Khartoum they burn the Israeli flag, and in London, in Oslo and in Zurich hate articles are published, supporting the destruction of Israel.
Any request in Internet search engines for the words "genocide" against "Muslims", "Arabs" or "Palestinians", in the context of "Zionists" or "Israel" - will give us endless results. Even after we've filtered out the trash, we are left with millions of publications written in deadly seriousness.
This abundance brings results. It works like brainwashing. It is the accepted position, and not just a fringe opinion. Only five years ago we were witness to a international anti-Israeli show in the Durban Convention. Only two years ago we were shocked when a member of our Academia blamed Israel of 'symbolic genocide' against the Palestinian people. Much ado about nothing. There are thousands of publications blaming Israel of genocide, and not 'symbolic'.
Under an academic and/or journalistic umbrella, today's Israel is compared to the damned Germany of yesteryear. In conclusion, there are those who call to terminate the 'Zionist project'. And in more simple words: because Israel is a country that perpetrates so many war crimes and engages in ethnic cleansing and genocide - it has no right to exist. This, for instance, is the essence of an article by the Norwegian writer Jostein Gaarder (writer of "Sophie's world"), who wrote, among other things: "We call killers of children by their name"). The conclusion is that Israel has no right to exist.
The tragedy is that in Arab and Muslim countries a massacre is happening. A genocide protected by the silence of the world. A genocide protected by a deception that is perhaps unparalleled in the history of mankind. A genocide that has no connection to Israel, to Zionism or to Jews. A genocide of mainly Arabs and Muslims, by Arabs and Muslims.
This is not a matter of opinion or viewpoint. This is the result of factual examination, as precise as possible, of the numbers of victims of various wars and conflicts that have taken place since the establishment of the State of Israel up till this time, in which the massacre continues. It is, indeed, death on a massive scale. A massacre. It is the wiping out of villages and cities and whole populations. And the world is silent. The Muslims are indeed abandoned. They are murdered and the world is silent. And if it bothers to open its mouth, it doesn't complain about the murderers. It doesn't complain about the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity. It complains about Israel.
This great deception, that covers up the real facts, endures and even grows because of one reason only: The Media and Academia in the West participate in it. In endless publications, books, periodicals and websites Israel is portrayed as a state that perpetrates "war crimes", "ethnic cleansing", and "systematic murder". Sometimes it is because this is fashionable, sometimes it is mistakenly, sometimes it is the result of hypocrisy and double standards. Sometimes it is new and old anti-Semitism, from the left and from the right, overt and covert. Most of the classic blood libels were refuted not long after they came into being. The blood libel of modern times, against the state of Israel, continues to grow. Many Israelis and Jews are accessories to the nurturing of the libel.
THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT
The Zionist settling of this country, which began at the end of the 19th century, did indeed create a conflict between Jews and Arabs. The amount of those killed in various clashes up till the establishment of the State of Israel was no more than a few thousands, of both Jews and Arabs. Most of the Arabs killed in those years were killed in armed struggles of Arabs amongst themselves; such as, for example, in the days of the Great Arab Uprising of 1936 - 1939. That was a sign of things to come. Many others were killed as a result of the harsh hand wielded by the British. Israel never did anything comparable.
Israel's War of Independence, known also as the War of 48', left between 5,000 to 15,000 dead from among the Palestinians and citizens of Arab countries. In this war, as in any war, there were indeed atrocities. The attackers declared their goal, and if they had won, a mass extermination of Jews would have taken place. On Israel's side there were also barbarous acts, but they were on the fringe of the fringe. Less, far less, than in any other war in modern times. Far less than what is being perpetrated every day in these very times, by Muslims, mainly against Muslims, in Sudan and in Iraq.
The next event of importance was the Sinai War of 1956. About 1,650 Egyptians were killed, about 1,000 at the hands of the Israelis and about 650 by the French and British forces.
Next came the Six Day War (1967- IJ). The highest estimates talk of 21,000 Arabs killed on all three fronts - Egypt, Syria and Jordan.
The Yom Kippur War (1973 - IJ) resulted in 8,500 Arab dead, this time on only two fronts - Egypt and Syria.
Then there were 'smaller' wars: The first Lebanon war, which was initially mainly against the PLO and not against Lebanon. This was a war in a war. These were the years of the bloody civil war in Lebanon, a war we will discuss further later on. And thus also in the second Lebanon war, in which about a thousand Lebanese were killed.
Thousands of Palestinians were killed during the Israeli occupation of the territories, that began at the end of the Six Day War. Most were killed during the two Intifadas, the one that commenced in 1987 and resulted in 1,800 Palestinian deaths, and the one that commenced in 2000 with a Palestinan death toll of 3,700. In between, there were more military actions that caused further Arab fatalities. If we exaggerate, we can say that these were a few hundred more who were killed. Hundreds. Not hundreds of thousands. Not millions.
The total count reaches about 60,000 Arabs killed in the framework of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Among them only several thousand Palestinians, although it is because of them, and only them, that Israel is the target of the world's anger. Every Arab and Muslim death is regrettable. And it is okay to criticize Israel. But the obsessive and demonic criticism emphasizes a far more amazing fact: The silence of the world, or at least relative silence, in the face of the systematic extermination of millions of others by Muslim and Arab regimes.
THE BLOOD PRICE OF THE MUSLIMS
From here on we must ask: How many Arabs and Muslims have been killed in those same years in other countries, for instance, in Russia or in France, and how many Arabs, Muslims and others, were killed in those same years by Arabs and Muslims. The information gathered here is based on various research institutes, academic bodies, international organizations (such as Amnesty and other bodies that follow human rights), the UN, and governmental agents.
In many cases the different organizations present different and contradictory numbers. The differences sometimes reach hundreds of thousands, and sometimes even millions. We will probably never know the precise number. But even the lowest agreed numbers, that are the basis for the tables given here, present a staggering and horrific picture. In addition, time is too short to survey bloody conflicts that are not even covered in these tables, although these conflicts took a higher human toll than the blood price of the whole Arab-Israeli conflict.
Algeria: A few years after the establishment of the State of Israel, there began another war of independence. This time it was Algeria against France, between the years 1954-1962. The number of victims on the Muslim side is a subject for controversy. According to official sources in Algeria it is over a million. There are research institutes in the west that tend to accept that number. French sources have tried in the past to claim that it is only a quarter of a million Muslims, with an additional 100,000 Muslim collaborators with the French. But these estimates are regarded as tendentious and low. Today there is no question that the French killed nearly 600,000 Muslims. And these are the French, who do not stop preaching to Israel, the Israel that in the whole history of its conflict with the Arabs failed to reach even one tenth of that number, and even then, according to the more severe assessments.
The massacre in Algeria continues. In the 1991 elections the Islamic Salvation Front was voted in. The results of the elections were cancelled by the army. Since then a civil war has been raging, between the central government, supported by the army, and Islamic movements. According to various estimates, there have been about 100,000 victims so far. Most of them have been innocent civilians. In most cases it has been horrific massacres of whole villages, women, children and old people. A massacre in the name of Islam.
ALGERIA SUMMARY: 500,000 to 1 million in the war of independence; 100,000 in the civil war in the 90's.
SUDAN: THE WORST SERIES OF CRIMES
Sudan: A country torn by campaigns of destruction, almost all of them between the Arab-Muslim north, that is control of the country, and the south, populated by blacks. Two civil wars have taken place in this country, and a massacre, under government patronage, has been taking place in recent years in the district of Darfur. The first civil war spanned the years of 1955-1972. Moderate estimates talk of 500,000 victims. In 1983 the second civil war began. But it wasn't a civil war but a systematic massacre suitably defined as 'genocide'. The goals were Islamization, Arabization and mass deportation, that occasionally becomes slaughter, also for the need to gain control over giant oil fields. We are talking about an estimated 1.9 million victims.
The division between Muslim and other victims is unclear. The large district of Noba, populated by many black Muslims, was served its portion of horrors. The Muslims, should they be black, are not granted any favors. Since the rise to power of radical Islam, under the spiritual guidance of Dr. Hassan Thorabi, the situation has worsened. This is probably the worst series of crimes against humanity since WWII. We're talking about ethnic cleansing, deportations, mass murder, slave trade, forcible enforcement of the laws of Islam, taking children from their parents and more. Millions have become refugees. As far as is known, there are not millions of publications about the Sudanese 'Right of Return' and there are no petitions by intellectuals negating Sudan's right to exist.
Recent years have been all about Darfur. Again Muslims (Arabs) are murdering (black) Muslims and heathens, and the numbers are unclear. Moderate estimates are talking about 200,000 victims, higher estimates say 600,000. No one knows for sure. And the slaughter continues.
Throughout the atrocities of Sudan, the slaughter has been perpetrated mainly by the Arab Muslim regime, and the great majority of victims, if not all, are black, of all religions, including Muslims.
SUDAN SUMMARY: 2.6 million to 3 million.
AFGHANISTAN: This is a web of nonstop mass killing - domestic and external. The Soviet invasion, which began on 24th December 1979 and ended on 2nd February 1989, left about a million dead. Other estimates talk of 1.5 million dead civilians and an additional 90,000 soldiers.
After the withdrawal of the Soviet Forces, Afghanistan went through a series of civil wars and struggles between the Soviet supporters, the Mojahidin and the Taliban. Each group carried out a doctrine of mass extermination of its opponents. The sum of the fatalities in civil war, up to the invasion of the coalition forces under American leadership in 2001, is about one million.
There are those who complain, and rightly so, about the carnage that took place as a result of the coalition offensive to overthrow the Taliban regime and as part of the armed struggle against al Qaida. Well, the invasion into Afghanistan caused a relatively limited number of deaths, less than 10,000. Had it not taken place, we would have seen a continuation of the self-inflicted genocide, with an average of 100,000 fatalities a year.
AFGHANISTAN SUMMARY: One million to one and a half million, as a result of the Soviet invasion; about one million in the civil war.
SOMALIA: UNENDING CIVIL WAR
Somalia: Since 1977 this Muslim state in East Africa has been immersed in an unending civil war. The number of victims is estimated at about 550,000. It is Muslims killing mainly Muslims. UN attempts to intervene, in the interest of peace keeping, ended in the failure, as did later attempts by American Forces.
Most of the victims died not in the battle fields, but as a result of deliberate starvation and slaughter of civilians, in bombardments aimed at the civilian population (massive bombardments of opponent districts, such as the bombardment of Somaliland, that caused the deaths of 50,000 ).
SOMALIA SUMMARY: 400,000 TO 550,000 VICTIMS IN THE CIVIL WAR.
BANGLADESH: 1 OF THE 3 GREATEST GENOCIDES
Bangladesh: This country aspired to gain independence from Pakistan. Pakistan reacted with a military invasion that caused mass destruction. It was not a war, it was a massacre. One to two million people were systematically liquidated in 1971. Some researchers define the events of that year in Bangladesh as one of the three greatest genocides in (history - IJ) (after the Holocaust and the Ruanda genocide).
An inquiry committee appointed by the government of Bangladesh counted 1.247 million fatalities as a result of systematic murder of civilians by Pakistan's army forces. There are also numerous reports of 'Death squads', in which "Muslim soldiers were sent to execute mass killings of Muslim farmers".
The Pakistani army ceased only after the intervention of India, which suffered from waves of refugees - millions - arriving from Bangladesh. At least 150 thousand more were murdered in acts of retaliation after the retreat of the Pakistan army.
BANGLADESH SUMMARY: 1.4 MILLION TO 2 MILLION.
INDONESIA: THE MASSACRE COMMENCED WITH A COMMUNIST UPRISING
Indonesia: The biggest Muslim state in the world competes with Bangladesh for the dubious title of 'The biggest massacre since the Holocaust'. The massacre commenced with a communist uprising in 1965. There are different assessments (of the number of fatalities - IJ) in this case as well. The accepted estimate talks of as many as 400 thousand Indonesians killed in the years 1965-1966, although stricter estimates claim the number is higher.
The massacre was perpetrated by the army, led by Hag'i Mohammed Soharto, who seized power in the country for the next 32 years. An investigator of those years points out that the person who was in charge of suppressing the rebellion, General Srv Adei, admitted: "We killed 2 million not 1 million, and we did good work". For this argument, we will stick to the lower, more accepted estimates.
In 1975, after the end of the Portuguese rule, East Timor announced its independence. Within a short time it was invaded by Indonesia, who ruled the area until 1999. During these years about 100,000 to 200,000 people were killed, along with the complete destruction of infrastructure.
INDONESIA SUMMARY: 400,000 killed, with an additional 100,000 to 200,000 in East Timor.
IRAQ: THE DESTRUCTION OF SADDAM HUSSEIN
Iraq: Most of the destruction of the last two decades was the doing of Saddam Hussein. This is another case of a regime that caused the deaths of millions. Nonstop death. One of the highpoints was during the Iran-Iraq war, in the conflict over the Shat El Arab River, the river that is created by the convergence of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. This was a conflict that led to nothing but large scale destruction and mass killing. Estimates are between 450,000 and 650,000 Iraqis, and between 450,000 and 970,000 Iranians. Jews, Israelis, and Zionists were not around, as far as is known.
Waves of purges, some politically motivated (opposition), some ethnic ( the Kurdish minority) and some religiously motivated (the ruling Suni minority against the Shiite majority), yielded an astounding number of victims. Estimates vary from one million, according to local sources, to a quarter million, according to Human Rights Watch. Other international organizations quote an estimate of about half a million.
In the years 1991 - 1992 there was a Shiite uprising in Iraq. There are contradictory estimates about the number of victims. The numbers vary from 40,000 to 200,000. In addition to the Iraqis that were slaughtered one must add the Kurds. During Saddam Hussein's reign, between 200,000 to 300,000 of them were killed in a genocide that continued all through the 1980's and the 1990's.
Over half a million more Iraqis died from diseases because of the shortage of medicine, which was the result of sanctions imposed after the first Gulf War. Today it is clear that this was a continuation of the genocide perpetrated by Saddam on his own people. He could have purchased medicine, he had enough money to buy food and to build hospitals for all the children of Iraq, but Saddam preferred to build palaces and to distribute franchises to many in the west and in Arab states. This issue is being exposed in the corruption of the UN's 'Oil for Food' project.
The Iraqis continue to suffer. The civil war that is raging there now - even if some would rather not give that name to the mutual massacre of Sunis and Shiites - is costing tens of thousands of lives. It is estimated that about 100,000 people have been killed since the coalition forces took control in Iraq.
IRAQ SUMMARY: 1.54 MILLION TO 2 MILLION VICTIMS.
IRAN SUMMARY: 450,000 TO 970,000 VICTIMS.
LEBANON: THE LEBANESE CIVIL WAR
Lebanon: The Lebanese civil war took place from 1975 to 1990. Israel was involved in certain stages, by way of the first Lebanon War in 1982. There is no disagreement that a considerable part of the victims were killed in the first two years.
The more assessments talk of over 130,000 killed. Most of them were Lebanese killed by other Lebanese, on religious, ethnic grounds and in connection with the Syrian involvement. Syria transferred its support between various parties in the conflict. The highest estimates claim that Israeli activities were the cause of around 18,000 people, the great majority of which were fighters.
LEBANON SUMMARY: 130,000.
Yemen: In the civil war that took place in Yemen from 1962 to 1970, with Egyptian and Saudi involvement, 100,000 to 150,000 Yemenites were killed, and more than a thousand Egyptians and a thousand Saudis.
Egypt committed war crimes by incorporating the use of chemical warfare. Riots in Yemen from 1984 to 1986 caused the deaths of thousands more.
YEMEN SUMMARY: 100,000 TO 150,000 FATALITIES.
Chechnya: Russia turned down Chechen Republic demands for independence, and this led to the first Chechen war of 1994 to 1996. The war cost the lives of 50,000 to 200,000 Chechens.
Russia put a great deal into this conflict, but failed miserably. This did not help Chechens, because although they had gained autonomy there republic was in ruins.
The second Chechen War began in 1999 and officially ended in 2001, but it has not really ended, and number of the victims is estimated at 30,000 to 100,000.
CHECHNYA SUMMARY: 80,000 TO 300,000 FATALITIES.
From Jordan to Zanzibar: In addition to the wars and the massacres, there have also been smaller confrontations, that have cost the lives of thousands and tens of thousands, of Muslims and Arabs (killed) by Muslims and Arabs. These confrontations are not even taken into account in the tables presented on these pages, because the numbers are small, relatively speaking, even though the numbers of those killed are far higher than the numbers of the victims of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Here are some of them:
Jordan: 1970 to 1971 the Black September riots took place In the Hashemite kingdom of Jordan. King Hussein was fed up of the Palestians use of the country and their threatened to take control of it. The confrontation, mainly a massacre in the refugee camps, took thousands of lives. According to estimates provided by the Palestinians themselves - 10,000 to 25,000 fatalities. According to other sources - a few thousand.
Half of the population of Chad are Muslims: In various civil wars 30,000 civilians have been killed.
In the mainly Muslim area of Yugoslavia about 10,000 were killed in the war there from 1998 to 2000.
Civil war from 1992 to 1996 left about 50,000 dead.
SYRIA: Hafez Assad's systematic persecution of the Muslim Brotherhood ended in the 1982 massacre in the city of Hama, costing the lives of about 20,000 people.
Thousands were killed in the beginning of the Humeini Revolution. The precise number is unknown, but is somewhere between thousands and tens of thousands. The Kurds also suffered at the hands of Iran, and about 10,000 of them were murdered there.
About 20,000 Kurds were killed in Turkey as part of the conflict there.
In the earlyu 1960's the island was granted independence, but only for a short time. At first, the Arabs were in power, but a black group, made up mainly of Muslims, slaughtered the Arab group, also Muslim, in 1964. The estimates are that 5,000 to 17,000 were killed.
Even this is not the end of the list. There were more conflicts with unknown numbers of victims in former USSR republics with Muslim majority populations (like the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagurno Karabach), and a disputable number of Muslims that were killed in mixed population countries in Africa, such as Nigeria, Mauritania or Uganda (in the years of Idi Amins reign in Uganda, in the decade that began in 1971, about 300,000 Ugandans were killed. Amin defined himself as Muslim, but in contrast to Sudan, it is hard to say that the background for the slaughter was Muslim, and it certainly wasn't Arab.
"TO LIQUIDATE THE JEWISH ENTITY"
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict
To all the above, one can add this data: The great majority of Arabs killed in the framework of the Israeli-Arab Conflict were killed as a result of wars instigated by the Arabs and as a result of their refusal to recognize the UN decision regarding the establishment of the State of Israel, or their refusal to recognize the Jews' right of self-definition.
The number of Israelis killed by Arab aggression has been relatively far than the numbers of Arabs killed. In the War of the Independence, for example, more than 6,000 Israelis were killed out of a population that was then made up of 600,000. This means: One percent of the population. In comparison with this, Arab fatalities in the war against Israel came from seven countries, the populations of which were already tens of millions. Israel did not dream, did not think and did not want to destroy any Arab state. But the ostensible goal of the attacking armies was "to liquidate the Jewish entity".
Obviously, in recent years, the Palestinian victims have received most of the attention of the Media and the Academia. In actual fact, these make up just a small percentage of the total sum of all victims. The total sum of Palestinians killed by Israel in the territories that were conquered is several thousand. 1,378 were killed in the first Intifada, and 3,700 since the start of the second Intifada.
This is less, for instance, than the Muslim victims massacred by former Syrian president, Hafez Assad in Hama in 1982. This is less than the Palestinians massacred by King Hussein in 1971. This is less than the number of those killed in one single massacre of Muslim Bosnians by the Serbs in 1991 in Srebrenica, a massacre that left 8,000 dead.
Every person killed is regrettable, but there is no greater libel than to call Israel's actions 'genocide'. And even so, the string 'Israel' and 'genocide' in Google search engine leads to 13,600,000 referrals. Try typing 'Sudan' and 'genocide' and you'll get less than 9 million results. These numbers, if you will, are the essence of the great deception.
The occupation is not enlightened, but is not brutal
Another fact: Since WWII, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the national conflict with the lowest number of victims, but with the world's highest number of publications hostile to Israel in the media and in the Academia.
At least half a million Algerians died during the French occupation. A million Afghanis died during the Soviet occupation. Millions of Muslims and Arabs were killed and slaughtered at the hands of Muslims. But all the world knows about one Mohammed a-Dura (whose death was regrettable, but there is some doubt whether he was killed by Israeli gunfire at all).
It is possible and acceptable to criticize Israel. But the excessive, obsessive, and at times anti-Semitic criticism serves also as a coverup, and in some cases also as an approval, of the genocide of millions of others.
Occupation is not enlightened and can't be enlightened. But if we try to create a scale of 'brutal occupation', Israel will come last. This is a fact. This is not an opinion.
And what would have happened to the Palestinians if, instead of being under Israeli occupation they were under Iraqi occupation? Or Sudanese? Or even French or Soviet? It is highly probable that they would have been victims of genocide, at worst, and of mass killings, purges, and deportations at best.
But luckily for them they are under Israeli occupation. And even if, I repeat, there is no such thing as an enlightened occupation, and even if it is acceptable and possible, and at times necessary, to criticize Israel, there is no occupation and there has never been an occupation with so few fatalities (indeed, there are other injuries that are not manifested in the numbers of fatalities, such as the refugee problem. This will be discussed in a separate chapter).
Television screen ethics
So why is the impression of the world the direct opposite? How come there is no connection between the facts and the numbers and the so very demonic image of Israel in the world?
There are many answers. One of them is that western ethics have become the ethics of television cameras. If a Palestinian terrorist or a Hizballah man tries to shoot a rocket from the midst of a civilian neighborhood, and Israel retaliates with fire - causing the death of two children - there will be endless headlines and articles all over the world that "Israel murders children". But if entire villages are destroyed in Sudan or whole cities are erased in Syria, there will be no television cameras in the area.
And so, according to television ethics, Jose Saramago and Harold Pinter sign a petition protesting 'genocide' and 'war crimes' perpetrated by Israel. They have never read the Geneva Convention either. They probably do not know that, aside for very few exceptions, the actions of Israel against military targets hitting civilians is allowed according to the Geneva Convention (protocol 1 paragraph 52.2). And because these people are so submerged in television ethics, they will not sign any petitions in protest of the genocide of Muslims by Muslims. Murder for the sake of it. They are allowed to do it.
Television ethics is a tragedy for the Arabs and the Muslims themselves. Israel pays dearly because of it, but the Arabs and the Muslims are its real victims. And as long as this blue screen morality continues, the Arabs and the Muslims will continue to pay the price.
There are those that claim that Arab and Muslim states are immune from criticism, because they are not democratic, but Israel is more worthy of criticism because it has democratic pretences. Claims like this are Orientalism at its worst. The covert assumption is that the Arabs and the Muslims are the retarded child of the world. They are allowed. It is not only Orientalism. It is racism.
The Arabs and the Muslims are not children and they are not retarded. Many Arabs and Muslims know this and write about it. They know that only an end to the self-deception and a taking of responsibility will lead to change. They know that as long as the west treats them as unequal and irresponsible it is lending a hand not only to a racist attitude, but also, and mainly, to a continuation of their mass murder.
The genocide that Israel is not committing, that is completely libellous, hides the real genocide, the silenced genocide that Arabs and Muslims are committing mainly against themselves. The libel has to stop so as to look at reality. It is in the interest of the Arabs and the Muslims. Israel pays in image. They pay in blood. If there is any morality left in the world, this should be in the interest of whoever has a remaining drop of it in him. And should it happen, it will be small news for Israel, and great news, far greater news, for Arabs and Muslims.
ARAB APARTHEID TARGETS PALESTINIANS Gatestone Institute, Khaled Abu Toameh, December 2017 Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist, is based in Jerusalem.
Palestinians say that what they are facing in Iraq is "ethnic cleansing." The new Iraqi law deprives Palestinians living in Iraq of their right to free education, healthcare and to travel documents, and denies them work in state institutions.
No one will pay any attention to the misery of the Palestinians in any Arab country. Major media outlets around the world will barely cover the news of the controversial Iraqi law or the displacement of thousands of Palestinian families in Iraq. Journalists are too busy chasing a handful of Palestinian stone-throwers near Ramallah. A Palestinian girl who punched an Israeli soldier in the face draws more media interest than Arab apartheid against the Palestinians.
Palestinian leaders, meanwhile care nothing about the plight of their own people in Arab countries. They are much too busy inciting Palestinians against Israel and Trump to pay such a paltry issue any mind at all.
Iraq has just joined the long list of Arab countries that shamelessly practice apartheid against Palestinians. The number of Arab countries that apply discriminatory measures against Palestinians while pretending to support the Palestinian cause is breathtaking. Arab hypocrisy is once again on display, but who who is looking?
The international media -- and even the Palestinians -- are so preoccupied with US President Donald Trump's announcement on Jerusalem that the plight of Palestinians in Arab countries is dead news. This apathy allows Arab governments to continue with their anti-Palestinian policies because they know that no one in the international community cares -- the United Nations is too busy condemning Israel to do much else.
So what is the story with the Palestinians in Iraq? Earlier this week, it was revealed that the Iraqi government has approved a new law that effectively abolishes the rights given to Palestinians living there. The new law changes the status of Palestinians from nationals to foreigners.
Under Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi dictator, the Palestinians enjoyed many privileges. Until 2003, there were about 40,000 Palestinians living in Iraq. Since the overthrow of the Saddam regime, the Palestinian population has dwindled to 7,000.
Thousands of Palestinians have fled Iraq after being targeted by various warring militias in that country because of their support for Saddam Hussein. Palestinians say that what they are facing in Iraq is "ethnic cleansing."
The conditions of the Palestinians in Iraq are about to go from bad to worse. The new law, which was ratified by Iraqi President Fuad Masum, deprives Palestinians living in Iraq of their right to free education, healthcare and to travel documents, and denies them work in state institutions. The new law, which is called No. 76 of 2017, revokes the rights and privileges granted to Palestinians under Saddam Hussein. The law went into effect recently after it was published in the Iraqi Official Gazette No. 4466.
A new Iraqi law, recently ratified by Iraq's President Fuad Masum, effectively abolishes the rights of Palestinians living there (free education, healthcare, travel documents, work in state institutions), changing the status of Palestinians from nationals to foreigners. Pictured: Iraqi President Fuad Masum (right) meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (left) on November 30, 2015. (Image source: Video screenshot, Office of Mahmoud Abbas)
"Instead of protecting the Palestinian refugees from daily violations and improving their living and humanitarian conditions, the Iraqi government is making decisions that will have a catastrophic impact on the lives of these refugees," said Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor.
"The recurrent harassment and restrictions imposed on Palestinian refugees in recent years have forced most of them to resort again to other countries such as Canada, Chile, Brazil and other European countries. Due to these violations, only about 7,000 out of 40,000 Palestinian refugees are now residing in Iraq. It is a shame to which an end should be put."
The law means, simply, that Palestinians would rather live in Canada or Brazil or any European country than live in an Arab country. They have more rights in non-Arab countries than they have in Arab ones. In the former, they can at least purchase property and enjoy healthcare and social benefits. Palestinians can even apply for citizenship in non-Arab countries and receive it. But not in countries such as Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. It is easier for a Palestinian to obtain Canadian or US citizenship than to get one from most of the Arab countries.
In a note of extreme irony, it is the Arab League that has advised its members not to give the Palestinians citizenship. The excuse: By granting Palestinians citizenship of Arab countries, you are denying them the "right of return" to their former homes inside Israel. So the Arab countries want the Palestinians to remain refugees forever by lying to them and telling them: you will one day go back to your former villages and towns (many of which do not even exist anymore) inside Israel.
Take, for example, the case of Amal Saker, a Palestinian woman who moved with her family to Iraq in 1976. Although she is married to an Iraqi national, and although her children have been granted Iraqi citizenship, she herself has not been given Iraqi citizenship. She says that the new law will now prohibit her from obtaining a travel document to visit her relatives outside Iraq. She and many Palestinians are convinced that the timing of the new law -- which coincided with Trump's announcement on Jerusalem -- is not coincidental. They believe that the new Iraqi law is part of Trump's purported "ultimate solution" for the Israeli-Arab conflict, which they are convinced is aimed at "liquidating" the Palestinian cause and depriving the Palestinians of the "right of return."
The Palestinians, in other words, are promoting a conspiracy theory according to which some Arab countries such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, are colluding with the Trump administration to impose a solution that is completely unacceptable and even harmful to the Palestinians.
The Palestinians are "horrified" by the new Iraqi law, and some have begun waging a campaign to pressure the Iraqi government to backtrack. But the Palestinians are also aware that they are not going to win this campaign, because they are not going to win the sympathy of the international community. Why? Because the name of the country that passed this apartheid law is Iraq and not Israel.
Jawad Obeidat, chairman of the Palestinian Lawyers' Syndicate, explained that the new Iraqi law will have "grave repercussions" on the conditions and future of Palestinians living in Iraq. "The Palestinians will now be deprived of most of their basic rights," Obeidat said.
He added that Palestinian lawyers will be working with their Iraqi colleagues to put pressure on the Iraqi government to rescind the new law. Obeidat appealed to the Arab League to intervene with the Iraqi authorities to rescind the law and stop the "injustice" towards the Palestinians in Iraq.
"The Iraqi law is unacceptable and inhumane," stated Tayseer Khaled, a senior PLO official. He pointed out that the Iraqi authorities have failed to provide protection to the Palestinians living in Iraq and that is why they became easy prey for various militias that prompted many of them to flee the country during the past 15 years. Khaled noted that many Palestinian families were forced to live in makeshift temporary refugee camps along the borders of Syria and Jordan after being driven from their homes. "We call on the Iraqi authorities to treat Palestinians humanely," he said.
Iraqi leaders, however, can afford to sit back and relax in the face of Palestinian appeals and condemnations. No one is going to pay any attention to the misery of the Palestinians in any Arab country. Major media outlets around the world will barely cover the news of the controversial Iraqi law or the displacement of thousands of Palestinian families in Iraq. Journalists are too busy chasing a handful of Palestinian stone-throwers near Ramallah. A Palestinian girl who punched an Israeli soldier in the face draws more media interest than Arab apartheid against the Palestinians. A protest of 35 Palestinians in the Old City of Jerusalem against Trump and Israel attracts more photographers and reporters than a story about endemic Arab apartheid and discrimination against the Palestinians.
The hypocrisy of the Arab countries is in full swing. While they pretend to show solidarity with their Palestinian brothers, Arab governments work tirelessly to ethnically cleanse them. Palestinian leaders, meanwhile care nothing about the plight of their own people in Arab countries. They are much too busy inciting Palestinians against Israel and Trump to pay such a paltry issue any mind at all.