Adonis Diaries

Archive for the ‘religion/history’ Category

Ridiculous: Palestinian people have never been “Invented People”

Note: Re-edit of “Are Palestinians an “Invented People”? And how Israel was invented? 2012″

I received a developed feedback from a reader (a Jew and Israelite), probably from a collection of posts on Palestine, and I decided to publish it, with minor editing.
“The name “Palestine” has been around for a long time. “Peleset” is transliterated from Egyptian hieroglyphics “P-l-s-t”. Palestine is found in numerous Egyptian documents referring to a neighboring people or land starting from around 1150 BC.
The “Philistine” States existed on the coastal plain between Jaffa and south to Gaza. At a short period Philistine co-existed with the faked ancient Kingdoms of Judah, located above this coastal  line. This supposed Kingdom of Israel never contemplated or was able to reach the seashore.
In the 5th Century BC, Herodotus wrote of a “district of Syria, called Palestine”.
About a century later, Aristotle described the Dead Sea in Meteorology and located it in Palestine:
“Again if, as is fabled, there is a lake in Palestine, such that if you bind a man or beast and throw it in it, it floats and does not sink, this would bear out what we have said. They say that this lake is so bitter and salty that no fish live in it and that if you soak clothes in it and shake them it cleans them.”
This writer frequently engaged in debates with Zionists (a bad habit I need to kick out!) who often tend to seize on small ideas, such as “When did the Palestinians ever have their own country?”
In order to win such an argument I would have to reduce myself to their terms, and produce a map that shows a country and borders: “Palestinian Kingdom, 1587- 1702”, and then let them present their map of ancient Israel and Judah, and then get into a wrestling match, and the winner would claim the territory of their own. 
Or perhaps the issue would be better settled the way the New York colony won Staten Island from New Jersey: with a boat race.
If the goal is exclusivity, as it always has been with Zionism, then the only criterion in achieving it is winning, whether a war or a race.
 
There was no 17th century Palestinian Kingdom, or 18th or 19th. This region was dominated by the Ottoman empire. Various provinces in a larger Ottoman empire, ruled from Istanbul (previously known as Constantinople, and before that, Byzantium), much as there are today various American States governed from Washington.
Allied victory over Germany and Turkey in World War I and the League of Nations granted “mandate ”power to France and England to control the region. France over Syria and Lebanon and Mosul: France relinquished more land to Turkey than current land in Syria. England had mandated power over Palestine, Jordan and middle and southern Iraq.
Objectors will cry “Foul!”, as Americans are governed by Americans in Washington, whereas “Arabs” were governed by Turks, a different ethnic group with a different language. As if the USA is one ethnic group.
Fine. So I modify my comparison to the Spanish speaking Puerto Ricans governed from Washington, or the French speaking Quebecois governed from Ottawa. Neither the Puerto Ricans nor the French Canadians are being ethnically cleansed.
 
Prior to Zionism, there was no need for the Palestine to focus on Palestinian identity. They were citizens of the Ottoman Empire. When, during the mandate years the British made contradictory promises to the Zionists and the “Arabs” in the Arabian Peninsula.
The “Arabs” and the Palestinians expected, and had the right to expect, eventual self-rule, it was certainly not a foregone conclusion that there was going to be an independent Palestine.
Palestinians might well have been a part of a larger South Syria, or of a Greater Syria, and happily so.
They certainly would not have been ethnically cleansed under those circumstances.
The Palestinians have always had their own distinct “Arabic” dialect, and various other cultural attributes that set them apart from other regional Arabic cultures, but that was never particularly relevant.
Many various subcultures existed within the Ottoman Empire, and continued to exist within British and French mandates. Interestingly, during the years of the Yishuv, the pre-Israeli-statehood, Zionist community in Palestine and Jewish-Zionist settlers called themselves “Palestinians”.
In this way, the Zionists ironically affirmed it Palestinian identity that many of them wish now to deny.
In 1948, amid the massacres and military forced mass expulsions of the “nakba” (Arabic for catastrophe, the name commonly given to the events of 1948), as the State of “Israel” was recognized by the UN by a majority of a single vote, all of the Jews who had been calling themselves Palestinians became “Israelis”.
When the dust cleared after expelling the Palestinians from their towns and villages, the Palestinians  who remained within the green line became “Arab Israelis”, like it or not.
The designation “Palestinian” was more actively embraced beginning in 1964, with the forming of the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization), this out of necessity, because a people who had been ethnically cleansed, who were in a state of shock and humiliation, and who were desperate to recover and regain what was rightfully theirs, found it useful to rally around symbols representing themselves: A name and a flag are two of the basics.
Golda Meir famously said in 1969, during her tenure as Israeli prime minister;
“There were no such thing as Palestinians. When was there an independent Palestinian people with a Palestinian State? It was either southern Syria before the First World War, and then it was a Palestine including Jordan. 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 away from them. They did not exist.”
I would not have been able to show Golda a map that says “Kingdom of Palestine” or “Grand Duchy of Palestine” or any of dozens of designations that might have satisfied her. But this I can say for sure: There were human beings on that land, and they had been there all their lives, and their families for many generations before them down through the centuries.
And many Palestinians were actually descended from ancient Jews who later converted to Christianity and Islam, while Golda’s and the Ashkenazi Jews, were converting to Judaism in the Khazar Kingdom on the shores of the Caspian Sea.
 
Golda actually knew and the information, which has become available to the general public in the decades since, that: We Jews did come and throw them out and take their country away from them. It’s been thoroughly documented. It wasn’t when she made this statement in 1969.  
Golda was able to get away with it then.
But since an entire generation of Jewish-Israeli scholars, (and many others, but we Jews need to hear it from Jews first!) has carefully documented the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and presented the history that she personally knew, but actively hid and denied.
Golda and her colleagues concealed the truth from Jewish supporters of Israel all over the world, including my family, who taught me lies quite innocently, because they didn’t know any better.
 
In 1984 a book written by Joan Peters, entitled From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine, was released to the world. The book claimed that the Palestinians were not resident in Palestine long-term, but were recent arrivals, having come to take advantage of economic opportunities in Palestine which were largely the result of Zionist Jewish settlement.
What a perfect way for us Zionist Jews to massage ourselves (I was one at the time!) and drive a wedge between ourselves and the growing awareness about Palestine in the world around us! So it really was a “land without people for a people without a land”?  And all those “Arabs” were immigrants!
And how ungrateful that the Palestinians hate us after all the opportunity we gave them! A wave of related claims surfaced among the Zionist community. An essay by Mark Twain describing his touring of a sparsely populated 19th century Palestine, was offered up into the mix of “Palestinian-denier” evidence.
Twain, whose writing was full of humorous and ironic opposition to human bullshit, was no doubt rolling in his grave over this. And claims were often heard that prominent Palestinians, from Edward Said to Yassir Arafat, were “not really Palestinian”.
 
Enter another book, in 2003, The Case for Israel by Alan Dershowitz. After 19 intervening years, Dershowitz borrowed heavily from same, Joan Peters’ book, giving the same statistics and making the same conclusions.
 
Enter yet another book, but this one very different: In Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History, published in 2005, Norman G. Finkelstein exposed Peters’s statistics as fraudulent, and with that revelation both her argument and that of Dershowitz, collapsed.
However, the damage is done among those who wish to ignore Finkelstein, and there are many! “Isn’t Finkelstein a holocaust denier?”, I’ve been asked. I respond: “No. His parents were holocaust survivors.”
Zionists have long used a familiar tactic against those who challenge their propaganda: Defamation. And so the lies persist.
This writer still has people putting From Time Immemorial in his face to prove their argument. They refuse to be embarrassed.
At the time of this writing (January 2012), the American public is being treated to an entertainment we get every four years: the run up to our presidential election. As the Democratic candidate will obviously be the incumbent, we are witnessing the Republican candidates claw at each other in their striving to win support for the Republican nomination.
Enter a billionaire Jewish American Zionist named Sheldon Adelson, casino magnate and the 8th wealthiest American alive, who along with his wife has donated $10 million to candidate Newt Gingrich. Adelson, whose holdings include the Israeli newspaper Israel HaYom (Israel Today) made some interesting statements while in Israel at an Israel Media Watch event in 2010:
“I am not Israeli. The uniform that I wore in the military, unfortunately, was not an Israeli uniform. It was an American uniform, although my wife was in the IDF and one of my daughters was in the IDF … our two little boys, one of whom will be bar mitzvahed tomorrow, hopefully he’ll come back– his hobby is shooting – and he’ll come back and be a sniper for the IDF.
 And:
“All we (the Adelson family) care about is being good Zionists, being good citizens of Israel, because even though I am not Israeli born, Israel is in my heart.
Does it sound like this guy has “divided loyalties?” Maybe like the Jewish/Evangelicals neocons in the Bush administration who got us to fight a proxy war for Israel in Iraq? No- you can’t say that! It would be “anti-Semitic”!
So is it any wonder that Newt Gingrich has made the utterly incorrect and profoundly idiotic statement that he has made about the Palestinians being an “invented” people? It has nothing to do with any education on the subject of the history, or any awareness of the current situation. 
It’s simply a question of wanting to win, and of reiterating nonsense he has heard in conversations with a very rich and generous supporter, nonsense which jives with the general impressions that Americans get from our Zionist-controlled media, and that no doubt circulate in Gingrich’s Republican circles.
Does anyone think Gingrich has read Finkelstein? I doubt it! And if he did, would he turn down $10 million in favor of truth and justice?
 
The people native to the land of Palestine were not “invented” as Rich Siegel said, and foolishly repeated by Newt Gingrich . It is indeed unfortunate that someone who is supposedly educated, and who has achieved position in life where he is poised to potentially become the next president of the United States, is putting forth such foolishness

Fiesta of the goat? Mario Vargas Llosa

109حفلة التيس ـــ ماريو فارغاس يوسا

لعلي كتبت عن هذا من قبل. إتقان الإثارة. البراعة في تصعيد الفضول لدى القاريء، ليجد نفسه متورطاً بالقراءة بفعل تلك الأفخاخ الصغيرة، المتقنة الصنع والتورية.

لا تغيب صورة غابرييل غارسيا ماركيز من على صفحات هذه الرواية. مقارنة، لا أعرف كم هو عدد الذين أجروها أثناء قراءتهم، تفرض نفسها: فالأحداث متشابهة والأبطال كذلك.

ولكن حكايات هذه الرواية هي أكثر”عقلانية”. يمكن لنا أن نصدق أنها حدثت ذات يوم في بلد حقيقي له خريطته وحدوده ومسؤوليه الذين تذكرهم كتب التاريخ. تاريخ صاخب كان المواطنون بلحمهم وحيواتهم وأبنائهم هم الحبر الذي كتب كل هذه الحكايا الممتعة.

مفارقة تبعث على الأسى.

أن تستمتع بقراءة رواية تحكي عن مأساة عاشها شعب بكامله.. وعن دماء حقيقية سالت.. وأن تكون ممتناً لقدر أتاح لهذا الكاتب أن يعيد صياغة كل هذه المذابح لتصير قابلة لقراءة تبعث على المتعة!

. فلا شيء في الرواية يمنعنا من التفكير بأنها مجرد سرد روائي لتاريخ تلك الجمهورية. كثرة الأحداث والألقاب والضحايا، والمؤامرات والانقلابات،

كلها أمور ممكنة الحدوث ونعرف أنها حدثت هناك في الجمهوريات التي كنا نسميها جمهوريات الموز.

إن تلك الخلطة السرية بين تاريخ بلد ما وبين قدرات الروائي على ربطنا إلى الثقب الذي فتحه لنتلصص ـــ حرفياً ـــ على أناس ذلك البلد ومسؤوليه، كانت مغرية ولذيذة، فأغرقتنا في الأحداث الدموية وألهتنا عن التساؤل عن سر استمتاعنا (المعيب!) بكل ذلك القهر الذي مارسه “التيس” على قطيع لا ينضب من الخراف.

هذا المزج المسكر بين أحداث تلزمه الذاكرة بروايتها، وبين خياله متحرراً من أثقال التاريخ، يستحق التنويه. فليس كل من جلس ليتذكر تاريخ بلاده قادراً على ذلك!.

فماذا عن تاريخ البلاد التي تعرفها؟

إن المقارنة مرعبة. في بلادك، الآن، يدور الحديث همساً عن رعب تثيره أعداد المنتشرين في القرى من السوريين. حتى أعلى الأصوات التي تدعونا إلى الاطمئنان، لا تكون واثقة بالكامل. في الرواية، تتشابه الأحداث فكأن القاريء ينظر في مرآة…

خمسة وعشرين عاماً من “الاحتلال” الهاييتي للدومينيكان، ثم حرية قليلة. ليبدأ بعد ذلك تدفق أعداد “الهاييتيين” بلباس مدني هذه المرة.

عمال في البداية، ثم بعد ذلك هاربون من سعير حرب في بلادهم.

لقد كان الحل في تلك الجمهورية قاسياً ودموياً. أما هنا، فإن القسوة التي لا تغادر بال البعض لا تزال تتخفى في أردية الانسانية والتفهم. ما الذي سيجري بعد ذلك؟

.. كيف سينتهي مصير هذه الملايين المتراكمة في ملاجئها البائسة؟.. لا يمكن لأحد أن يحزر.

يمكنني بسهولة أن أحس بلذة الكاتب أثناء كتابة هذا النص. عنايته الواضحة بتقسيم الفصول، ورواية الأحداث بدون أن تفلت منه “معلومة” واحدة تكشف أسرار الرواية للقاريء قبل الوقت الذي يحدده هو.

مثل قاتل يتسلى بغرس نصل سكينه قليلاً قليلاً في جسد ضحيته.. في أماكن متفرقة وغير مميتة.. حتى تكاد الضحية أن تتوهم أـنها في طريقها إلى النجاة.. ولكن هيهات. فالنصل يزداد في كل لحظة حدة وانغراساً، حتى أن النجاة لا تعود مرئية.

فلنترك الرواية وكاتبها. أنت كقاريء، وغيرك آخرون،

هل تقرأ عن تاريخ الدومينيكان أم أن ذاكرتك ومخيلتك تصور لك ما يجري في بلادك؟.. كل الأحداث سمعت عنها بشكل أو بآخر وبأسماء مختلفة ( بنفس الألقاب).

. سمعتها شفهياً وقرأت مثلها في الصحف أو في كتب التاريخ التي كتبها أشخاص وقادة خلصوا بلادهم من العتاة ليصيروا بعد شهور قليلة مثلهم أو أعتى حتى.

حتى مصائر أولئك القادة تتشابه. سيرهم. فسادهم. حاشيتهم بكامل أعضائها، التي تنتقل مثل غرض جامد بولائها إلى الزعيم الجديد بتضحيات قليلة أو كثيرة، ولكنها تضحيات كافية لتتابع تلك الأسر فسادها في الجمهوريات والممالك الجديدة!.

في الجزء الأخير تصير الرواية سرداً وتأريخاً لأحداث تلك الفترة في تاريخ تلك الجمهورية.

أقول إن الرواية تفقد جزءاً من روعتها، فكأنها خلعت ثوب الرواية لتلبس ثياب التاريخ. وأكثر ما يؤكد ذلك هو ابتعاد الأبطال الحقيقيين للرواية عن الصفحات ليتركوها لكمية من المعلومات التي لا تتعلق بهم شخصياً، ولا بمصائرهم. هذا الحد الفاصل بين الرواية والتاريخ الذي تجاوزه الكاتب أضر بالرواية كما قلت.

الرواية تحتاج إلى معلومات عن أشخاصها وإلى أحداث تتعلق بأبطالها، هي بكلمات أخرى تأريخ لحياة أبطالها. أما تاريخ تلك الجمهورية وتحولاتها الدموية نحو ديمقراطية لا نعرف مقدار الحقيقة فيها، فهو شأن الدومينيكانيين.

ولكن ماريو بارغاس يوسا، الكاتب وليس المؤرخ، يعرف ذلك بالتأكيد. ولذلك لم يفاجئني أنه خبأ الفصل الأخير من روايته لإرضاء أكثر قرائه تطلباً.

فعرفنا، مثلما رغب كل قاريء من سطر الرواية الأول، ما الذي جرى بين أغوسطين كابرال وابنته الجميلة أورانيتا.
26 كانون الثاني 2018

Before colonial powers took over Africa: Africa history

Note 1: Repost of 2014 of “Africa, Uncolonized: A Detailed Look at an Alternate Continent”

Note 2: Maps were drawn upside down during the Arabic Empire and they skew the current traditional eurocentric point of direction.
Africa was called before the European colonization Al-Kebulan or Alkebulan meaning ‘Garden of Life’, ‘Cradle of Life’, or simply ‘the Motherland’
Frank Jacobs, November 12, 2014
Uitsny_suid_afrika

What if the Black Plague had killed off almost all Europeans?

The Reconquista in Spain would have never happened.

If Spain and Portugal didn’t kickstart Europe’s colonization of other continents in the 16th century, this is what Africa might have looked like.

The map shows an Africa dominated by Islamic states, and native kingdoms and federations.

All have at least some basis in history, linguistics or ethnography.

None of their borders is concurrent with any of the straight lines imposed on the continent by European powers, during the 1884-85 Berlin Conference and in the subsequent Scramble for Africa.

By 1914, Europeans controlled 90% of Africa’s land mass.

Only the Abyssinian Empire (modern-day Ethiopia) and Liberia (founded in 1847 as a haven for freed African-American slaves) remained independent.

This map is the result of an entirely different course of history. The continent depicted here isn’t even called Africa [1] but Alkebu-Lan, supposedly Arabic for ‘Land of the Blacks’ [2].

That name is sometimes used by those who reject even the name ‘Africa’ as a European imposition.

It is therefore an ideal title for this thought experiment by Swedish artist Nikolaj Cyon.

Essentially, it formulates a cartographic answer to the question: What would Africa have looked like if Europe hadn’t become a colonizing power? 

To arrive at this map, Cyon constructed an alternative timeline. Its difference from our own starts in the mid-14th century.

The point of divergence: the deadliness of the Plague.

In our own timeline, over the course of the half dozen years from 1346 to 1353, the Black Death [3] wiped out between 30 and 60% of Europe’s population. It would take the continent more than a century to reach pre-Plague population levels. That was terrible enough.

But what if Europe had suffered an even more catastrophic extermination – one from which it could not recover?

Allohistorical Africa, seen from our North-up perspective. The continent’s superstates (at least size-wise): Al-Maghrib, Al-Misr, Songhai, Ethiopia, Kongo and Katanga.

European colonies in Africa in ‘our’ 1913.

Blue: France, pink: Britain, light green: Germany, dark green: Italy, light purple: Spain, dark purple: Portugal, yellow: Belgium, white: independent. Lines reflect current borders.

Cyon borrowed this counterfactual hypothesis from The Years of Rice and Salt, an alternate history novel by Kim Stanley Robinson. The book, first published in 2002, explores how the depopulation of Europe would have altered world history.

Robinson speculates that Europe would have been colonized by Muslims from the 14th century onwards, and that the 20th century would see a world war between a sprawling Muslim alliance on the one side, and the Chinese empire and the Indian and native American federations on the other.

Cyon focuses on Africa – or rather, Alkebu-Lan – which in his version of events doesn’t suffer the ignominy and injustice of the European slave trade and subsequent colonization.

In our timeline, Europe’s domination of Africa obscured the latter continent’s rich history and many cultural achievements.

On the map of Cyon’ s Africa, a many-splendored landscape of nations and empires, all native to the continent itself, gives the lie to the 19th- and 20th-century European presumption that Africa merely was a ‘dark continent’ to be enlightened, or a ‘blank page’ for someone else to write upon.

Basing himself on Unesco’s General History of Africa, Cyon built his map around historical empires, linguistic regions and natural boundaries.

His snapshot is taken in 1844 (or 1260 Anno Hegirae), also the date of a map of tribal and political units in Unesco’s multi-volume General History.

Al-Andalus, in this timeline still a dependency of Al-Maghrib; and the Emirate of Sicily to the left of the map.

Zooming in on the northern (bottom) part of the map, we see an ironic reversal of the present situation: in our timeline, Spain is still holding on to Ceuta, Melilla and other plazas de soberania in Northern Africa.

In Cyon’s world, most of the Iberian peninsula still called Al-Andalus, and is an overseas part of Al-Maghrib, a counterfactual Moroccan superstate covering a huge swathe of northwestern Africa.

Sicily, which we consider to be part of Europe, is colored in as African, and goes by the name of Siqilliyya Imārat (Emirate of Sicily).

The Arabic is no accident.

Absent the European imprint, Islam has left an even more visible mark on large swathes of North, West and East Africa than it has today.

Numerous states carry the nomenclature Sultānat, Khilāfat or Imārat. And what are the difference between a Caliphate, Sultanate and Emirate?

A Caliph claims supreme religious and political leadership as the successor (caliph) to Muhammad, ideally over all Muslims.

I spot two Caliphates on the map: Hafsid (centered on Tunis, but much larger than Tunisia), and Sokoto in West Africa (nowadays: northwest Nigeria).

Sokoto, Dahomey, Benin and other states in country-rich West Africa. 

A Sultan is an independent Islamic ruler who does not claim spiritual leadership.

Five states in the greater Somalia region are Sultanates, for example: Majerteen, Hiraab, Geledi, Adāl and Warsangele. Others include Az-Zarqa (in present-day Sudan), Misr (Egypt, but also virtually all of today’s Israel), and Tarābulus (capital: Tripoli, in our Libya).

An Emir is a prince or a governor of a province, implying some suzerainty to a higher power. There’s a cluster of them in West Africa: Trarza, Tagant, Brakna, all south of Al-Maghrib. But they are elsewhere too: Kano and Katsina, just north of Sokoto.

Islam of course did not originate in Africa, and some would claim that its dominance of large areas of Africa, at the expense of pre-existing belief systems, is as much an example of foreign cultural imperialism as the spread of Western religions and languages is in our day.

But that is material for another thought experiment. This one aims to filter out the European influence.

Neither European nor Arab influence is in evidence in the southern part of Africa – although some toponyms relate directly to states in our timeline: BaTswana is Botswana, Wene wa Kongo refers to the two countries bearing that name. Umoja wa Falme za Katanga is echoed in the name of the DR Congo’s giant inland province, Katanga.

Rundi, Banyarwanda and Buganda, squeezed in between the Great Lakes, are alternative versions of ‘our’ Burundi, Rwanda and Uganda.

Some familiar-sounding names around the Great Lakes.

There is an interesting parallel to the Africa/Alkebu-Lan dichotomy in the toponymic ebb and flow of Congo and Zaïre as names for the former Belgian colony at the center of the continent.

Congo, denoting both the stream and the two countries on either of its lower banks [4], derives from 16th- and 17th-century Bantu kingdoms such as Esikongo, Manikongo and Kakongo near the mouth of the river.

The name was taken up by European cartographers and the territory it covered eventually reached deep inland.

But because of its long association with colonialism, and also to fix his own imprint on the country, Congo’ s dictator Mobutu in 1971 changed the name of the country and the stream to Zaïre.

The name-change was part of a campaign for local authenticity which also entailed the Africanisation of the names of persons and cities [5], and the introduction of the abacos [6] – a local alternative to European formal and business wear.

Curiously for a campaign trying to rid the country of European influences, the name Zaïre actually was a Portuguese corruption of Nzadi o Nzere, a local term meaning ‘River that Swallows Rivers’.

Zaïre was the Portuguese name for the Congo stream in the 16th and 17th centuries, but gradually lost ground to Congo before being picked up again by Mobutu.

After the ouster and death of Mobutu, the country reverted to its former name, but chose the predicate Democratic Republic to distinguish itself from the Republic of Congo across the eponymous river.

Kongo – a coastal superstate in the alternative timeline.

This particular tug of war is emblematic for the symbolism attached to place names, especially in Africa, where many either refer to a pre-colonial past (e.g. Ghana and Benin, named after ancient kingdoms), represent the vestiges of the colonial era (e.g. Lüderitz, in Namibia), or attempt to build a postcolonial consensus (e.g. Tanzania, a portmanteau name for Tanganyika and Zanzibar).

By taking the colonial trauma out of the equation, this map offers a uniquely a-colonial perspective on the continent, whether it is called Africa or Alkebu-Lan.

Map of Alkebu-Lan and excerpts thereof reproduced by kind permission of Nikolaj Cyon.

See it in full resolution on this page of his website. Map of Africa in 1913 by Eric Gaba (Wikimedia Commons User: Sting), found here on Wikimedia Commons.

_______________

Strange Maps #688

[1] A name popularized by the Romans. It is of uncertain origin, possibly meaning ‘sunny’, ‘dusty’ or ‘cave-y’.

[2] The origin and meaning of the toponym are disputed. The Arabic for ‘Land of the Blacks’ would be Bilad as-Sudan, which is how the present-day country of Sudan got its name.

Other translations offered for Alkebu-Lan (also rendered as Al-Kebulan or Alkebulan) are ‘Garden of Life’, ‘Cradle of Life’, or simply ‘the Motherland’. Although supposedly of ancient origin, the term was popularized by the academic Yosef A.A. Ben-Jochannan (b. 1918).

The term is not a 20th-century invention, however. Its first traceable use is in La Iberiada (1813), an epic poem from 1813 by Ramón Valvidares y Longo. In the index, where the origin of ‘Africa’ is explained, it reads: “Han dado las naciones á este pais diversos nombres, llamándole Ephrikia los Turcos, Alkebulan los Arabes, Besecath los Indios, y los pueblos del territorio Iphrikia ó Aphrikia: los Griegos, en fin, le apellidaron Libia, y despues Africa, cuyo nombre han adoptado los Españoles, Italianos, Latinos, Ingleses y algunos otros pueblos de la Europa”.

[3] A.k.a. the Plague, a very contagious and highly deadly disease caused by Yersinia pestis. That bacterium infested the fleas that lived on the rats coming over from Crimea to Europe on Genoese merchant ships.

[4] In fact, Brazzaville and Kinshasa, capitals of the Republic of Congo and the Democratic Republic of Congo respectively, are positioned across from each other on the banks of the Congo River – the only example in the world of two national capitals adjacent to each other.

[5] The ‘founder-president’ himself changed his name from Joseph-Désiré Mobutu to Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendu wa za Banga. The capital Léopoldville was renamed Kinshasa, after an ancient village on the same site.

[6] Despite the African-sounding name, abacos is an acronym of à bas costumes, or: ‘Down with (Western) suits’.

What is the story of this Walking Rabbi on Palm Sunday?

Note: A repost of my article of 2009 “From Palm Sunday to the Last Supper: what happened? (August 27, 2009)”

Jesus enters Jerusalem on a Sunday morning; he had chased out the money changers and those doing “business as usual” by the Temple the day before.

Jesus is received as a popular Rabi leader and messiah; he is mounted on a donkey (jahesh) that Jesus had already rented for the day.

For six months by now, Jesus advanced toward Jerusalem for the yearly celebration.

Thousands of pilgrims and followers were accompanying him.  Jesus was not a desk Rabi; not an urban Rabi.  Jesus was a walking Rabbi followed by thousands of long marching disciples.

On Thursday evening and after the Last Supper, Jesus is made prisoner and convicted of fomenting disruption by the Jewish Sanhedrin in Jerusalem according to 3 of the 4 formal testaments from bible authors and retained by Byzantium in 325 AC.

From Sunday till the Last Supper what happened?

This year celebration was not a run of the mill event: Jerusalem was swarmed by thousands of different brands of pilgrims and a walking Rabi entered preaching and speaking a new message.

A walking Rabi was lambasting the Pharisee and the other Jewish sects of the priesthood.

The Jewish Sanhedrin has been gathering intelligence on Jesus for over a year now and it has accumulated a thorough biography of Jesus and his messages.

More plausibly, the Roman governor Pilate and the King of Lower Galilee Herod Epiphany were tracking intensively Jesus progress toward Jerusalem: Both were very edgy of this non-violent movement:

1. Herod had decapitated John the Baptist, a very close relative of Jesus who is being followed by masses from Galilee, putting a serious dent on Herod political credibility…

2. Pilate was at ease with the current Jewish leaders and could not understand how to deal with this new unorthodox leader.

The Sanhedrin knew that Jesus of Galilee was the “son of Marie“; it was convinced and the rumors aided a lot that Joseph was not the genetic father of Jesus, and Mathew poured oil on the fire by relating a not convincing story 60 years later.

I don’t care one way or another who was the real father of Jesus, but everyone else at that period did care and must have known, especially the Sanhedrin.

The Jews named the eldest sons after the patriarch of the family.  The Sanhedrin knew that Jesus was a “gentile” who was circumcised by law during the century old Maccabees Kingdom, and that he followed the Jewish rituals. Jesus of Galilee was attached administratively and juridically to the city of Tyr in Lebanon.

The Sanhedrin was highly upset and frightened that this walking Rabi knew more on the Book and the history of the Jewish priesthood than the most learned among them.

And yet, not a historian, not a document, not an anecdote recounted what happened between Sunday and Thursday, a land of scholars.

These four days are as blank as the period of Jesus between 12 and 30 years of age.

After Jesus was crucified, all the frightened apostles huddled in a remote house.

From the testimony of the apostles, all that they retained from Jesus’ message was that there is another “coming” and pretty soon. More probably 3 days after any apostol passes away.

After news of Jesus resurrection reached the apostles, the second coming was confirmed to the apostles with a twistthe second coming will take place during their lifetime. If they die before the “coming” then they will be resurrected within 3 days to participate in the final event. 

Thomas would not be railroaded one more time: he wants to touch Jesus and check the wounds.

Jesus has been teaching his message in parabolas, the best technique for verbal retention.

These parabolas were in the Gnostic literature of the Land and the examples were extracted from the custom and tradition of the Land (Palestine, Syria and Lebanon).

The apostles had nothing else to teach of the spiritual message of Jesus: they didn’t even comprehend the message.

The apostles retained what differed from the Jewish daily rituals and customs. Maybe Jesus was funny and told his stories in a funny way, but the testimonies of the apostles were not that funny.

Most probably the funny apostles with a sense of humor were not taken that seriously and their accounts forgotten, burned, and destroyed.

From Sunday to Thursday we know nothing of the activities and whereabouts of Jesus or his apostles.

Were the disciples scattered to disseminate the new message?

Was Jesus preaching and meeting with the masses?

Has Jesus discussed with a few priests in the Sanhedrin?

What is certain is that the Roman Pilates had no facts or accounts on Jesus activities that may substantiate fomenting any civil revolt.

The Sanhedrin was reduced to asking Jesus abstract and metaphysical questionsAre you the son of God?

The Sanhedrin would not be humiliated by convicting a “gentile” on Jewish religious grounds; it would not legally stick with the Romans who did not meddle in sect divergences.

The Sanhedrin would not bring troubles to its structure of interests by spreading an accusation that a popular movement was underway contesting its legitimacy.

The Sanhedrin was in a major predicament, but would not allow Jesus to freely resume his teaching: And Jesus was to die in Jerusalem before he gets out of their jurisdiction.

These events did not take place in pre-history.  The Land was highly civilized and cultured.

The elites spoke Greek, Roman, Aramaic, and Hebrew.

The Land had been disseminating all sorts of philosophical schools, sciences, and literature.

And yet, nothing to account from Sunday to Thursday!

Could you say that we have a biography of Jesus?  The Jews even created a biography for Noah! I love biographies and I am not at all satisfied with what I have gotten.

Thousands of Christian “heretics” who believed only in the human nature of Jesus were persecuted, imprisoned, and crucified for not abiding by Byzantium orthodox dogma.  Why did they have to defy a stupid orthodox dogma since there were no confirmed documents describing the entire life of Jesus?

Thousands of Christian “heretics” who believed only in the spiritual nature of Jesus were persecuted and executed for not following the orthodox dogma; why did they have to revolt against the orthodox dogma since even the apostles did not care or comprehend that much about Jesus spiritual message?

Before the Corona spread into the western colonial powers: what were their ideological reasoning?

أليس مثيراً للصدمة , أن يتعامل بعض مقكري الغرب مع فيروس كورونا , كظاهرة فلسفية (وحتى كظاهرة غيبية) ,

كان لا بد منها لتفكيك الاستقطاب الايديولوجي , والاستقطاب الثقافي , والاستقطاب القبلي , في القرن الحادي والعشرين ؟

حين كتب فرنسيس فوكوياما مقالته الشهيرة “نهاية التاريخ والانسان الأخير” , في مجلة “ناشونال انترست” صيف 1989 , احتفى كثيرون في العالم بتلك “الرؤية الخلاقة” للزمن البشري . الايديولوجيا ماتت بموت الشيوعية . التاريخ ما لبث أن التحق بها .

هذه حقبة النيوليبرالية والعولمة . الأولوية لقيم السوق . التكنولوجيا فعلت فعلها في الانسان وفي الطبيعة . ردات الفعل كانت عاصفة على نظرية العالم السياسي الأميركي . يقظة القوميات , حتى ببعدها القبلي , ويقظة الأديان .

في منطقتنا حدث ذلك الشيء العجيب .

اسلام الكهوف , بالتأويل الدموي للنص , بدا وكأنه وضع الاسلام الحقيقي جانباً . ثمة من حاول تحويل الديانة الى ايديولوجيا , والايديولوجيا الى … مقبرة !
فوكوياما اعتذر .

التاريخ عاد الى الحلبة . هذا ما بدا جليّاً في آسيا الوسطى , والقوقاز , وصولاً الى البلقان . أيضاً , الايديولوجيا بالتكشيرة الخشبية . بالتوازي مع اتهام ايران بتسويق الاسلام الجنائزي , كانت نظريات أسامة بن لادن , وصولاً الى أبي بكر البغدادي , تذهب بالعدمية الى حدودها القصوى .

لنعد الى ما كتبه غلاة المحافظين في الولايات المتحدة , وسواء كانوا تلامذة ليو شتراوس أم تلامذة برنارد لويس .

غداة ظهور فيروس كورونا , ثم انتقاله , للتو , الى ايران , قالوا هذا عقاب كل من يحاول المس بـ”أميركا المقدسة” . هي “مملكة الله” باعتبارها تستضيف كل الأنواع , وكل الأجناس , وكل الحضارات , البشرية .

حيوان مجهري , لامرئي , غامض , يضرب التنين في القلب . هكذا تعود الصين , ويعود اقتصادها , عقوداً الى الوراء . أميركا سيدة القرن . توقعوا أن يتفكك النظام التيوقراطي في ايران . لاحظوا أن الجمهورية الاسلامية تعاني من هشاشة بنيوية مريعة في مواجهة الفيروس . روبرت كاغان سأل : “اذاً , لمن يعمل الغيب في هذهالحال ؟” .

في لبنان , وبغض النظر عن البدايات الملتبسة في المعالجة , ثمة من كان يعتبر أن الوباء يأتي من مكان واحد , ويفتك بفئة واحدة , أو بمنطقة واحدة ,

قبل أن يتبين أنه يأتي من أكثر من مكان , حتى من الدول التي تعتبر الأكثر رقياً , والأكثر تفاعلاً , مع ديناميات الحداثة .

كورونا غزا أميركا . للتو تلاشت الأسطورة . ستيف بانون , وكان كبير مستشاري البيت الأبيض , لاحظ أن رأس دونالد ترامب يكاد أن يسقط في أي لحظة , الا اذا تمكنت المختبرات الأميركية من صناعة اللقاح المضاد . آنذاك لا أحد يمكن أن يزحزحه من مكانه .

ولايات عزلت . جامعة هارفارد , الأولى في العالم , أقفلت أبوابها . أين هي , في هذه الحال تكنولوجيا … ما بعد الزمن ؟

بول كروغمان , الحائز جائزة نوبل في الاقتصاد , رفع صوته . دعا الى تدمير كل الترسانات البيولوجية , والجرثومية , وحتى النووية . قال بـ”الدخول أكثر فأكثر في الانسان” !

كلنا الآن داخل منازلنا (داخل جحورنا) . نخاف حتى من الهواء . هذا لا يمنع بعض الساسة عندنا من ممارسة هواية التفاهة . لو لم يكن الوباء قد استشرى عالمياً لكانت الطبقة السياسية حزمت حقائبها الى أمكنة آمنة . هم الآن مثل رعاياهم (ضحاياهم) في الزنزانة

كل اللبنانيين يتوحدون الآن في الخوف . تعالوا نبدل الميثاق الوطني , ووثيقة الطائف , بميثاق كورونا . هو الأكثر فاعلية , والأكثر شفافية , في الولوج الى العمق البشري .

الكورونا كظاهرة فلسفية . كروغمان قال “لندع من يخترع مضاداً للفيروس يقود العالم” . أميركا أم الصين ؟ لننتظر …

Who are behind all those genocides in the Middle-East at the start of the 20th century?

Again Christians and Armenians and minorities?

Who are those Donma sect behind the planning for the execution of these genocide? The Jews of Salonica who faked converting to Islam.

Note: Imperial Germany was in control of Turkey and its prime nemesis was Imperial Russia and encouraged these genocides of Christians supporting Orthodox Russia

Nassib Abu Dergham posted in Lebanon daily Al Bina2

 

«دونمة» المجازر… «دونمة» التقسيم 1

د. نسيب أبوضرغم

ونحن في الذكرى المئة لمجازر اليهود بحق الأرمن، على يد جمعية الاتحاد والترقي شكلاً، وبتخطيط من اليهودية العالمية أساساً، لا بدّ من الكشف عن حقيقة هذه الجمعية الطورانية، وبخاصة لجهة سيطرة اليهود عليها، ودورها في إحداث الخطوة الأولى من مخطط احتلال فلسطين والسيطرة على سورية الطبيعية والعالم العربي برمّته.

بدءاً، لا بد من تعريف «الدونمة»، فهي لفظة، تعني الظلمة أو الاستتار، اتخذها يهود سالونيك شعاراً لتحقيق أهدافهم في الإمساك بالدولة العثمانية، وإزالة المعوقات كافة من طريق وصولهم إلى القدس.

يقول المؤرخ Seton Watson: «إنّ الحقيقة البارزة في تكوين جمعية الاتحاد والترقي، إنها غير تركية وغير إسلامية، فمنذ تأسيسها لم يظهر بين زعمائها وقادتها عضو واحد من أصل تركي صاف، فأنور باشا مثلاً هو ابن رجل بولندي مرتد، وكان جاويد الأصل دافيد من الطائفة اليهودية المعروفة بالـ»دونمة». وكراسو Crasso من اليهود الإسبان القاطنين في مدينة سالونيك

وكان طلعت باشا بلغارياً من أصل غجري اعتنق الإسلام ديناً…». ويضيف واطسون: «إن أصحاب العقول المحركة وراء الحركة كانوا يهوداً أو مسلمين من أصل يهودي، وأما العون المالي فكان يجيئهم عن طريق «الدونمة» ويهود سالونيك الأغنياء».

بناءءً عليه، يكون أعضاء الدونمة هم من غير المسلمين الذين تظاهروا باعتناقهم الإسلام لتدمير الدولة العثمانية، والإمساك بمقدراتها وتوظيفها في خدمة المشروع اليهودي الجهنمي. «ولقد كان للدونمة في سالونيك دور بارز في الحياة السياسية والاقتصادية لتركيا الحديثة…

وكان أهم تأثير سياسي لهم عليها تركيا الحديثة مشاركتهم الفعالة في جمعية الاتحاد والترقي، التي قادت الانقلاب على السلطان عبد الحميد الثاني في بداية القرن العشرين 1908 ».

إن جمعية الاتحاد والترقي تمثل الترجمة السياسية والاقتصادية والثقافية لمضمون الدونمة، وكان بالتالي من البداهة أن يكون أركان هذه الجمعية من يهود الدونمة والماسونيين، ولأن لهذه الجمعية الدور الأساس في إخراج تركيا من روحها وشكلها،

لا بدّ من الإشارة إلى زعماء هذه الجمعية، للإنارة على الدور اليهودي الأساس في التخطيط لإسقاط الدولة العثمانية من تاريخها، عبر عملية التتريك بالفكرة الطورانية، الفكرة التي ما زالت تمثل حتى اليوم روح القومية التركية.

وللإضاءة أكثر على ما جرى، لا بدّ من كشف حقيقة الفكرة الطورانية والشخصيات التي ابتكرتها.

يقول المؤلف البريطاني إيليو غريننيل ميرز في مؤلفه حول «تركيا الحديثة» في فقرة مأخوذة من تقارير دائرة البحوث البريطانية الصادرة سراً حول الحركة الطورانية: «إن الطورانية في نشأتها محبوكة أ- فنياً، ب أوروبياً، ولم يختلقها العثمانيون من الأدب الفارسي لمصلحتهم، بل هي موحاة إليهم من الأوروبيين وهم لم يخططوا لها، بل خُططت لهم،

فالعثمانيون، إذن ليسوا مخططين، ولا متابعين لها، وإنما هم استغلوا كأداة ووسيلة وحسب».

وأيضاً فقد أورد سركيس كيفورك يورنسوزيان في دراسة بعنوان «ومضات من تاريخ كاراباخ» أن «مبتكري هذه النظرية الطورانية ليسوا أتراكاً، بل صهاينة يتحدر معظمهم من أصل يهودي، جعلوا لهذه النظرية عمداً وأساساً يرتكز إلى أن جميع الشعوب التركية تنحدر من أصل طوراني واحد الأتراك- التركمان- الأذريون- القرقيز- الأوزباك- الطاجيك…. ».

ولأهمية إبراز الدور اليهودي في عملية الاستيلاء على السلطنة العثمانية، وارتكاب المجازر باسم القومية الطورانية، لا بدّ من الإضاءة على أهم الكُتاب الذين أسسوا لهذا البناء الطوراني.

1 – المستشرق اليهودي أرمينيوس فامبيري، صديق حميم للسلطان عبد الحميد الثاني هو من أصل هنغاري .

2 – المستشرق اليهودي الألماني فرنزفون ويرنر، كتب تحت اسم مستعار مراد أفندي .

3 – المستشرق اليهودي البولوني قسطنطين برجتسكي، الذي كتب بِاسم مستعار مصطفى جلال الدين باشا ، نشر كتاباً عام 1889 «الأتراك القدامى والجدد».

4 – المستشرق اليهودي الفرنسي ليون كاهون، كتب كتاب «مقدمة لتاريخ آسيا».

5 – اليهودي آلبرت كوهين، كتب بِاسم مستعار تكين ألب .

6 – خالدة أديب مشكوك في أصلها ، ولكن توجهها صهيوني واضح، في كتابها «دولة بني طوران الجديدة»، لنلاحظ الشبه مع تعبير دولة بني صهيون ، تدعو فيه إلى سيطرة تركيا على الشعوب المجاورة، وقد سميت برسول الطورانية و»ملليت أناسي» أي أم الملكة.

7 – الكاتب ضياء كوك ألب من ديار بكر نشر كتاباً بعنوان «الأسس التركية» 1923 أثبت فيه توجهه الصهيوني.

يظهر من خلال ما ورد، أن إبداع الفكرة الطورانية كان بفعل اليهود والماسونيين،

وما كانت جمعية الاتحاد والترقي إلا الإطار التنظيمي لمشروع اليهود القاضي بإسقاط الدولة العثمانية والسيطرة على مقدراتها بواسطة يهود أظهروا إسلامهم،

والجمعية لم تتأسس حتى بقرار من هؤلاء اليهود الذين تزعموها، بل كان ذلك بقرار صهيوني رفيع.

يقول المؤرخ Seton Watson: «كانت هذه الجمعية إحدى إفرازات المجلس الصهيوني العالمي، كما كان قادتها وزعماؤها من الدونمة والماسونيين… أنشئت، بأمر من المجلس الصهيوني العالي بتمويل صهيوني عن طريق جاويد David اليهودي والصهيوني العريق».

ولقد اعترف أحد أعضاء الدونمة، قرة قش زادة محمد رشدي، وهو كان عضواً سابقاً فيها وأمام مجلس الأمة التركي في الثلث الأول من القرن العشرين: «بأن الدونمة ما هم إلا يهود باطنيون ولا يمتون إلى الإسلام بصلة».

كان لا بدّ من الإضاءة على المواضيع التي وردت، حتى يمكننا إظهار الصلة الوثيقة بين الصهيونية العالمية والأحداث التي أدت إلى سقوط الدولة العثمانية، وإبادة الأرمن وغيرهم من السريان والآشوريين، وبالتالي حكم تركيا عبر أحد أبرز قادة الدونمة مصطفى كمال.

كان لا بد من إبادة الأرمن في نظر يهود الدونمة، حتى تقوم القومية التركية،

وقد لعب يهود الدونمة دورهم بالكامل ونفذوا المجزرة بشكل وحشي، لم يشهد التاريخ البشري مثيلاً له، والناظر إلى أسماء الذين أوكل إليهم أمر الإبادة، يدرك مدى التماهي بين الصهيونية والطورانية والذي ما زال قائماً حتى اليوم.

وهم: جمال باشا السفاح، طلعت باشا، أنور باشا، د. ناظم باشا، بهاء الدين باشا، شاكر باشا، عزيز بك، جواد بك، عاطف رضا بك. وكانوا جميعاً من يهود الدونمة.

يقول رشيد رضا: «إنّ زعماء جمعية الاتحاد والترقي كلهم من شيعة الماسونية وإن من لوازم تشيعهم للماسونية قوة نفوذ اليهود فيهم وفي الدولة. وذلك يقتضي فوز الجمعية الصهيونية في استعمار بلاد فلسطين…» .

لقد أردنا من إلقاء الضوء على طبيعة حكام تركيا في بداية القرن وأصلهم اليهودي، لنربط في حلقات مقبلة، كيف أن الدور الذي رسمه اليهود للدولة التركية في بداية القرن، ما زالت تلك الدولة تقوم به حتى اليوم تحت مسميات عديدة.

يجب أن لا ننسى أن تركيا هي أول دولة إسلامية اعترفت بـ»إسرائيل»،

وتركيا هي الدولة الإسلامية الوحيدة المنخرطة في حلف شمالي الأطلسي، وتركيا هي معبر لأفعى التقسيم اليهودية، الذي تعمل له على مدى سورية الطبيعية.

ولا تنسوا كيليكيا والإسكندرون.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

April 2020
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Blog Stats

  • 1,377,098 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 721 other followers

%d bloggers like this: