Adonis Diaries

Archive for May 28th, 2013

“You sexually harassed me, and my older sister too…” (fiction story, Chapter 4)

The gang of Mani, Baptiste, and Tenderness came down for lunch at 2 pm.

I happened to be there, working on editing a few of my articles.

I stepped into the kitchen and without warning Mani immediately uttered:

“So I heard that you had a fight with my youngest sister last night… That was wrong”

If you are interested in what Mani was referring to, do read first

I replied: “Yes, I had to defend myself from physical aggressions. But no physical harms ensued. Your sister suffers from hormones imbalance…”

Mani retorted: “Self defense on a young girl of 15 is not acceptable. I understand how much you suffered in your life, but reacting physically is not permissible…”

I replied: “Self defense is admissible in all cases. Your sister should have learned by now that initiating a physical attack on people is wrong. If you have trained your sister to behave adequately and stopped cajoling her everytime she throws a tantrum, we would not have had this conversation…”

Mani said: “You are never to respond physically to my sister attacks, even in self defense. We have suffered you enough and in the event of recurrence, you’ll have to deal with me…”

I have no idea how he might deal with me, and I didn’t care for Mani’s soft outburst that dripped of poison and condescension.

I replied: “I will always react physically to anyone who attacks me physically. Someone in this family has to point to the correct attitude. And I tell you that you don’t know your sister: She would have spat in my face if I didn’t confront her physically…”

Baptiste, the hairy tall new comer in the extended family, and about to go bald in a couple of years, interjected in the discussion and blurted out with effusion and anger: “You were wrong. Period. That you disagree with everyone around this table is a good reason for voicing an ultimatum…”

From the onset, I had this strong feeling that this meeting was programmed and rehearsed, and the three members of the gang were intent on vomiting their venom.

I had no idea this Baptiste applied this brand of “democracy”: If you disagree from the vast majority (only 3 people around the table), you are the bad sheep to be kicked in the behind… Baptiste was the least of my concerns and I refused to reply to his “opinion”.

I always strongly suspected Baptiste to be this unidirectional kind of people, idiotically clinging to a restricted set of value system… Occasionally camouflaged under a kind and smiling face.

I know that mother likes Baptiste very much and appreciate his dedication to her married granddaughter. Mother and Baptiste easily laugh to one another quips and he is very respectful to mother, and I have no complaints in that respect…  and I am comfortable with this bonding.

Except that Baptiste cannot fool me: When he has an opinion about another person (a perception), nothing can alter his position…

And here Radyia (Contented) barged in, furious and ready to scream her anger, a pent up anger that never finds a release valve.

Radyia gave a short break to her sweet ass from the couch, sitting for hours watching stored TV series on her laptop. Radyia is now about 18, but looking younger for her small stature, flat chested, and seemingly skinny when dress the way she does.

Radyia repeated the same statements and arguments of her younger sister, as if her sister learned exactly how to reply from Radyia.

Radyia went a step further and screamed: “You sexually harassed me, and my older sister too. You should never be allowed in this house…” (It is an apartment that dad gave them).

Radyia ejaculation didn’t turn out to be a bombshell to the assembled party. As if they had coordinated their roles in that comical scene.

Their mother Concita was wiping the dust in the dinning room, and her hand movements got faster and frantic. As if she was wondering: “Is this family evolving into a mad and unchecked entity?”

I asked Radyia for explanation and what she recalls when she was 13 of age, But Baptiste whisked her away, back to her comfortable couch.

Mani resumed with a mocking smile: “Not two but three sisters. And you were lucky: My dad contemplated to take you to court many years ago, and desisted…”

Now, that was news to me.

They are 4 sisters, and I wondered who was spared and who is cultivating a front page story. And I said: “Name the sisters and tell me what happened and what you considered sexual harassment…”

Mani said: “They are not here now, and I am not in a position to speak on their behaves…” (And why he was so confident in his statement?)

Mani taunted himself to be very careful not to be biased in his discussions and be fair by hearing both parties… Not in this case, and not today.

Claiming sexual harassment is a lost case, anyway you try to explain or respond. Best way is to communicate in writing.

When a girl of 13, not pretty, skinny, short and flat chested is curious about the transformation in her physical and emotional states, she never lacks of tricks to implicitly let you make a move.

Maybe there are very few males who are perceptive and hot enough to comprehend the first  female signals.  In my case, many signals are needed and done in many ways to attract my attention.

Frankly, it is hard to pinpoint what was going on, how the process got started and evolved. The only moment I can recall is the first time I touch tits of a receptive girl.

Radyia was 13 then, and she is 18 now, and she is as flat chested, as small and as not pretty as ever.

No matter how she keeps with the latest fashion and try hard to look sexy and attractive. No boy ever fell for her, yet.

Radyia used to come down in her transparent night gown to see me. Understandable. It is very hot here in summertime, and no air conditioned facilities.

Her descents got frequent and with a twist every time: variations in attraction tactics…

I finally got it and felt pity for her unstable emotional situation.

What could I do with this girl and how could I handle such a situation?

Three clear alternatives to ponder upon:

1. You refrain from reacting and making a move, telling her bullshit story that she is beautiful and attractive… but this is not right. You cannot fool a girl this way: Children are better than adult in recognizing what you are trying to convey and avoid. And she will be thinking: “I am not beautiful and I am not attractive, and you are full of shit…”. And this girl will hate you and despise you for the way you treated her with condescension, an idiot girl, a non-entity..

2. You respond harshly that her attitude is indecent, that only sluts do these things… The message is the same, though not as bad as the previous alternative. The girl will stop treating you as friend to rely upon in times of needs…

3. A third alternative is to say nothing, touch the breasts, kiss the neck. Going no further…

I touched her breast a little.

The next afternoon she was back, for more. What the heck: Soon her older brothers will be playing with her tits for “fun”, and Radyia will be screaming, playfully. As she should.

The troubles come later, as a repeat is expected and the process gets complicated: Holding hands is fine for a week…

And one party gets tired of the game. And one partner learns to get detached.

I had written a poem on what happened and let Radyia read it. She did read it reluctantly. I asked her: “What is your opinion”. She replied: “This post is not correct”.

I wanted to reedit the poem to include her side of the story, but Radyia refused. I assumed that she lacked the verbal ability to express her feelings.

And the girl grows up and forgets the situational conditions: It is not possible that she had made the move toward this elderly creature…

Radyia’s bitterness has no bound, and her humorless acquired condition is totally abject.

She couldn’t lure any boy, even a brainless one, to fall for her. Not a single boy, None. No matter how she dressed in the latest fashion and tried to attract boys.

It is a lost cause:

If you refrain from interfering with family affairs, the extended family circle, and your experience taught you not to engage in family troubles, you are blamed for detachment behavior, heartless feelings, and lack of compassion, of loyalty… for the general good

If you occasionally get engaged in family matters, you are designated as the convenient subject to load all the blame on your shoulders… for immersing yourself into issues that are None of your “business”. All the troubles are heaped on your head…

And these grown kids have forgotten that they relied on me to take them to parks, zoos, biking by the rivers, hiking, swimming, skiing, going to movies… and giving rides to schools and universities, a teaching how to drive…

And I am barely suffered to be among these people

What the heck. We grow up in stages, and we have to deal with each stage as we best knew how.

Germany and USA: The most anti-Semite and staunchest supporters of Israel… Why?

The Bund, or the General Jewish Labor Union in Lithuania, Poland, and Russia, which was founded in Vilna in early October 1897, a few weeks after the convening of the first Zionist Congress in Basel in late August 1897, would become Zionism’s fiercest enemy.

The Bund joined the existing anti-Zionist Jewish coalition of Orthodox and Reform rabbis who had combined forces a few months earlier to prevent Herzl from convening the first Zionist Congress in Munich, which forced him to move it to Basel. Jewish anti-Zionism across Europe and in the United States had the support of the majority of Jews who continued to view Zionism as an anti-Jewish movement well into the 1940s.

Anti-Semitic chain of pro-Zionist enthusiasts

Realizing that its plan for the future of European Jews was in line with those of anti-Semites, Herzl’s strategy early on was an alliance with the latter. He declared in Der Judenstaat that:

“The Governments of all countries scourged by anti-Semitism will be keenly interested in assisting us to obtain [the] sovereignty we want.”

Herzl‘s added that “not only poor Jews” would contribute to an immigration fund for European Jews, “but also Christians who wanted to get rid of them“. Herzl unapologetically confided in his Diaries that:

The anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies.”

When Herzl began to meet in 1903 with infamous anti-Semites like the Russian minister of the interior Vyacheslav von Plehve, who oversaw anti-Jewish pogroms in Russia, it was an alliance that he sought by design. That it would be the anti-Semitic Lord Balfour, who as Prime Minister of Britain in 1905 oversaw his government’s Aliens Act, which prevented East European Jews fleeing Russian pogroms from entering Britain in order to save the country from the “undoubted evils” of “an immigration which was largely Jewish”, was hardy coincidental.

Balfour’s infamous Declaration of 1917 to create in Palestine a “national home” for the “Jewish people”, was designed, among other things, to curb Jewish support for the Russian Revolution and to stem the tide of further unwanted Jewish immigrants into Britain.

The Nazis would not be an exception in this anti-Semitic chain of pro-Zionist enthusiasts.

Indeed, the Zionists would strike a deal with the Nazis very early in their history. It was in 1933 that the infamous Transfer (Ha’avara) Agreement was signed between the Zionists and the Nazi government to facilitate the transfer of German Jews and their property to Palestine, and which broke the international Jewish boycott of Nazi Germany started by American Jews.

It was in this spirit that Zionist envoys were dispatched to Palestine to report on the successes of Jewish colonization of the country.

The Nazi officer and official, Adolf Eichmann, returned from his 1937 trip to Palestine full of fantastic stories about the achievements of the racially-separatist Ashkenazi Kibbutz, one of which he visited on Mount Carmel as a guest of the Zionists.

Despite the overwhelming opposition of most German Jews, it was the Zionist Federation of Germany that was the only Jewish group that supported the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, as they agreed with the Nazis that Jews and Aryans were separate and separable races.

This agreement was not a tactical support but one based on ideological similitude. The Nazis’ Final Solution initially meant the expulsion of Germany’s Jews to Madagascar. It is this shared goal of expelling Jews from Europe as a separate inassimilable race that created the affinity between Nazis and Zionists all along.

While the majority of Jews continued to resist the anti-Semitic basis of Zionism and its alliances with anti-Semites, the Nazi genocide not only killed 90 percent of European Jews, but in the process also killed the majority of Jewish enemies of Zionism who died precisely because they refused to heed the Zionist call of abandoning their countries and homes.

After the War, the horror at the Jewish holocaust did not stop European countries from supporting the anti-Semitic programme of Zionism. On the contrary, these countries shared with the Nazis a predilection for Zionism. They only opposed Nazism’s genocidal programme.

European countries, along with the United States, refused to take in hundreds of thousands of Jewish survivors of the holocaust.

In fact, these countries voted against a UN resolution introduced by the Arab states in 1947 calling on them to take in the Jewish survivors.

Yet, these same countries would be the ones who would support the United Nations Partition Plan of November 1947 to create a Jewish State in Palestine to which these unwanted Jewish refugees could be expelled.

The pro-Zionist policies of the Nazis

The United States and European countries, including Germany, would continue the pro-Zionist policies of the Nazis. Post-War West German governments that presented themselves as opening a new page in their relationship with Jews in reality did no such thing.

Since the establishment of the country after WWII, every West German government (and every German government since unification in1990) has continued the pro-Zionist Nazi policies unabated.

There was never a break with Nazi pro-Zionism.

The only break was with the genocidal and racial hatred of Jews that Nazism consecrated, but not with the desire to see Jews set up in a country in Asia, away from Europe. Indeed, the Germans would explain that much of the money they were sending to Israel was to help offset the costs of resettling European Jewish refugees in the country.

After World War II, a new consensus emerged in the United States and Europe that Jews had to be integrated posthumously into white Europeanness, and that the horror of the Jewish holocaust was essentially a horror at the murder of white Europeans.

Since the 1960s, Hollywood films about the holocaust began to depict Jewish victims of Nazism as white Christian-looking, middle class, educated and talented people not unlike contemporary European and American Christians who should and would identify with them.

Presumably, if the films were to depict the poor religious Jews of Eastern Europe (and most East European Jews who were killed by the Nazis were poor and many were religious), contemporary white Christians would not find commonality with them.

Hence, the post-holocaust European Christian horror at the genocide of European Jews was not based on the horror of slaughtering people in the millions who were different from European Christians, but rather a horror at the murder of millions of people who were the same as European Christians.

This should explain why in a country like the United States, which had nothing to do with the slaughter of European Jews, there exists upwards of 40 holocaust memorials and a major museum for the murdered Jews of Europe, but not one for the holocaust of Native Americans or African Americans for which the US is responsible.

Aimé Césaire understood this process very well. In his famous speech on colonialism, he affirmed that the retrospective view of European Christians about Nazism is that

The supreme barbarism, the crowning barbarism that sums up all the daily barbarisms; that it is Nazism, yes, but that before [Europeans] were its victims, they were its accomplices. And they tolerated that Nazism before it was inflicted on them, that they absolved it, shut their eyes to it, legitimized it:  until then, it had been applied only to non-European peoples.

That they have cultivated that Nazism, that they are responsible for it, and that before engulfing the whole of Western, Christian civilization in its reddened waters, it oozes, seeps, and trickles from every crack.

For Césaire, the Nazi wars and holocaust were European colonialism turned inwards is true enough.

Since the rehabilitation of Nazism’s victims as white people, Europe and its American accomplice would continue their Nazi policy of visiting horrors on non-white people around the world, on Korea, on Vietnam and Indochina, on Algeria, on Indonesia, on Central and South America, on Central and Southern Africa, on Palestine, on Iran, and on Iraq and Afghanistan.

The rehabilitation of European Jews after WWII was a crucial part of US Cold War propaganda. As American social scientists and ideologues developed the theory of “totalitarianism”, which posited Soviet Communism and Nazism as essentially the same type of regime, European Jews, as victims of one totalitarian regime, became part of the atrocity exhibition that American and West European propaganda claimed was like the atrocities that the Soviet regime was allegedly committing in the pre- and post-War periods.

Israel would jump on the bandwagon by accusing the Soviets of anti-Semitism for their refusal to allow Soviet Jewish citizens to self-expel and leave to Israel was part of the propaganda.

Commitment to white supremacy

It was thus that the European and US commitment to white supremacy was preserved, except that it now included Jews as part of “white” people, and what came to be called “Judeo-Christian” civilization. European and American policies after World War II, which continued to be inspired and dictated by racism against Native Americans, Africans, Asians, Arabs and Muslims, and continued to support Zionism’s anti-Semitic programme of assimilating Jews into whiteness in a colonial settler state away from Europe, were a direct continuation of anti-Semitic policies prevalent before the War.

It was just that much of the anti-Semitic racialist venom would now be directed at Arabs and Muslims (both, those who are immigrants and citizens in Europe and the United States and those who live in Asia and Africa) while the erstwhile anti-Semitic support for Zionism would continue unhindered.

West Germany’s alliance with Zionism and Israel after WWII, of supplying Israel with huge economic aid in the 1950s and of economic and military aid since the early 1960s, including tanks, which it used to kill Palestinians and other Arabs, is a continuation of the alliance that the Nazi government concluded with the Zionists in the 1930s.

In the 1960s, West Germany even provided military training to Israeli soldiers, and since the 1970s has provided Israel with nuclear-ready German-made submarines with which Israel hopes to kill more Arabs and Muslims. Israel has in recent years armed the most recent German-supplied submarines with nuclear tipped cruise missiles, a fact that is well known to the current German government.

Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak told Der SPIEGELin 2012 that Germans should be “proud” that they have secured the existence of the state of Israel “for many years”. Berlin financed one-third of the cost of the submarines, around 135 million euros ($168 million) per submarine, and has allowed Israel to defer its payment until 2015.

Doesn’t these supports makes Germany an accomplice in the dispossession of the Palestinians? This is of no more concern to current German governments than it was in the 1960s to West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer who affirmed that “the Federal Republic has neither the right nor the responsibility to take a position on the Palestinian refugees“.

This is to be added to the massive billions that Germany has paid to the Israeli government as compensation for the holocaust, as if Israel and Zionism were the victims of Nazism, when in reality it was anti-Zionist Jews who were killed by the Nazis.

The current German government does not care about the fact that even those German Jews who fled the Nazis and ended up in Palestine hated Zionism and its project and were hated in turn by Zionist colonists in Palestine.

As German refugees in 1930s and 1940s Palestine refused to learn Hebrew and published half a dozen German newspapers in the country, they were attacked by the Hebrew press, including by Haartez, which called for the closure of their newspapers in 1939 and again in 1941.

Zionist colonists attacked a German-owned café in Tel Aviv because its Jewish owners refused to speak Hebrew, and the Tel Aviv municipality threatened in June 1944 some of its German Jewish residents for holding in their home on 21 Allenby street “parties and balls entirely in the German language, including programmes that are foreign to the spirit of our city” and that this would “not be tolerated in Tel Aviv”.

German Jews, or Yekkes as they were known in the Yishuv, would even organize a celebration of the Kaiser’s birthday in 1941 (for these and more details about German Jewish refugees in Palestine, read Tom Segev’s bookThe Seventh Million”.

Add to that Germany’s support for Israeli policies against Palestinians at the United Nations, and the picture becomes complete. Even the new holocaust memorial built in Berlin that opened in 2005 maintains Nazi racial apartheid, as this “Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe” is only for Jewish victims of the Nazis who must still today be set apart, as Hitler mandated, from the other millions of non-Jews who also fell victim to Nazism.

That a subsidiary of the German company Degussa, which collaborated with the Nazis and which produced the Zyklon B gas that was used to kill people in the gas chambers, was contracted to build the memorial was anything but surprising, as it simply confirms that those who killed Jews in Germany in the late 1930s and in the 1940s now regret what they had done because they now understand Jews to be white Europeans who must be commemorated and who should not have been killed in the first place on account of their whiteness.

The German policy of abetting the killing of Arabs by Israel, however, is hardly unrelated to this commitment to anti-Semitism, which continues through the predominant contemporary anti-Muslim German racism that targets Muslim immigrants.

Euro-American anti-Jewish tradition

The Jewish holocaust killed off the majority of Jews who fought and struggled against European anti-Semitism, including Zionism.

With their death, the only remaining “Semites” who are fighting against Zionism and its anti-Semitism today are the Palestinian people.

Whereas Israel insists that European Jews do not belong in Europe and must come to Palestine, the Palestinians have always insisted that the homelands of European Jews were their European countries and not Palestine, and that Zionist colonialism springs from its very anti-Semitism.

Whereas Zionism insists that Jews are a race separate from European Christians, the Palestinians insist that European Jews are nothing if not European and have nothing to do with Palestine, its people, or its culture. What Israel and its American and European allies have sought to do in the last six and a half decades is to convince Palestinians that they too must become anti-Semites and believe as the Nazis, Israel, and its Western anti-Semitic allies do, that Jews are a race that is different from European races, that Palestine is their country, and that Israel speaks for all Jews.

That the two largest American pro-Israel voting blocks today are Millenarian Protestants and secular imperialists continues the very same Euro-American anti-Jewish tradition that extends back to the Protestant Reformation and 19th century imperialism. 

But the Palestinians have remained unconvinced and steadfast in their resistance to anti-Semitism.

Israel and its anti-Semitic allies affirm that Israel is “the Jewish people”, that its policies are “Jewish” policies, that its achievements are “Jewish” achievements, that its crimes are “Jewish” crimes, and that therefore anyone who dares to criticize Israel is criticizing Jews and must be an anti-Semite.

The Palestinian people have mounted a major struggle against this anti-Semitic incitement. They continue to affirm instead that the Israeli government does not speak for all Jews, that it does not represent all Jews, and that its colonial crimes against the Palestinian people are its own crimes and not the crimes of “the Jewish people”, and that therefore it must be criticized, condemned and prosecuted for its ongoing war crimes against the Palestinian people.

This is not a new Palestinian position, but one that was adopted since the turn of the 20th century and continued throughout the pre-WWII Palestinian struggle against Zionism.

Israel’s claim that its critics must be anti-Semites presupposes that its critics believe its claims that it represents “the Jewish people”.

But it is Israel’s claims that it represents and speaks for all Jews that are the most anti-Semitic claims of all.

Today, Israel and the Western powers want to elevate anti-Semitism to an international principle around which they seek to establish full consensus. They insist that for there to be peace in the Middle East, Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims must become, like the West, anti-Semites by espousing Zionism and recognizing Israel’s anti-Semitic claims.

Except for dictatorial Arab regimes and the Palestinian Authority and its cronies, on this 65th anniversary of the anti-Semitic conquest of Palestine by the Zionists, known to Palestinians as the Nakba, the Palestinian people and the few surviving anti-Zionist Jews continue to refuse to heed this international call and incitement to anti-Semitism.

The Palestinians affirm that they are, as the last of the Semites, the heirs of the pre-WWII Jewish and Palestinian struggles against anti-Semitism and its Zionist colonial manifestation. It is their resistance that stands in the way of a complete victory for European anti-Semitism in the Middle East and the world at large.

Note: An extract from the lengthy article by Joseph Massad.  Massad teaches Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New York.

He is the author of The Persistence of the Palestinian Question: Essays on Zionism and the Palestinians. 




May 2013

Blog Stats

  • 1,515,950 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 822 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: