Lord Ogugua Anunoby,
Respect Sir! See how I have elevated you – from Professorship to Lordship!
As Rumi opines, your very next elevation might be to angelhood!
You say that "Israel is not going to go away. We all know this for a fact."
You probably "know" that as "a fact" only because you know that should Israel keep on making concessions to those who believe that Israel is "occupying Arab Land" then there would be no Israel left.
I was unpleasantly reminded of what you call "Israel's occupation and land grab" when I checked out something in the Christian Scriptures in which Lord Jesus Christ in Acts of the Apostles 1: 7-8 mentions his beloved Jerusalem, his Judea and Samaria now known by the Palestinians as "The West Bank" , singing in Arabic, like a Ladysmith Black Mambazo choir in South Africa, "Black is black, I want my country back"
You say that "Iran made public its nuclear development program" What are you talking about? Transparency? Kitman and Taqiyya?
Heaven forbid that I should trivialise the threat from Iranian nuclear weapons when they have already promised "to wipe Israel off the map!"
If you want to start with the scroll there's the Book of Esther. Moving to more recent fact Cyrus II of Persia was called Messiah ...
Lately, you make a lot of tall claims about Iran. So how did the Persian Empire come about? And how did the Ottoman Empire come into being? How do you think the British Empire or indeed any other empire came into being? Islam conquered Persia (that's why for them, Umar (Sunnism's 2nd Caliph) is the most hated Arab that has ever lived (including Saddam Hussein). The Safavids introduced Shi'ism. About peaceful Persia, just look at the career of Nader Shah during whose reign more than half of Iraq and vast swathes of Afghanistan and some of the former soviet republics were part of the vast Persian Empire which was still expanding in all directions. When you consider the doctrine of Dar-al-Islam versus dar al harb – with ISIS now laying claim to Spain and all that has ever, even once been under Islamic jurisdiction you must arrive at the sane understanding that Islam is not in recession – dawah is in progress and military aggression is in abeyance/ suspension due to a hudna - with pal al-Islam biding its time until the military forces of Islam are strong again. In the meantime ask any Islamist and he will tell you that when the US falls then Islam will take over. So Islam is waiting for the downfall of what Iran calls "the great and the little Satan"
The notion of dar al Islam and dar al Harb is the foundation of Article 11 of the Hamas Charter.
Let me hasten to assure you: my Yoruba Professor always makes complete sense, I don't know whether he is pro-Iran or not, but he does not discriminate and by "everybody" he means everybody including you and me, and every Tom, Dick and Harry includes Fidel Castro, Kim Jong-un, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad & His Holiness (any of them) when he says that if they want nuclear weapons they should be "allowed" to have them. The premise – based on equal rights - - is that either everybody should be allowed to have nuclear weapons or nobody should be allowed to have nuclear weapons.
Your probable question is "What would Hamas want to do with nuclear weapons?"
The answer to the question: If Hamas had nuclear weapons would there be this Operation Protective Edge?
Do you bless Israel but not the Israeli Constitution , so called?
Is the Torah no longer Israel's Constitution?
I have no high horse (or camel) to sit on and from which height to pontificate about the greatness of Israeli compassion and humanity
I always take as fore granted certain basic knowledge about Israel and the history of the Middle East. Sometimes when simplicity is unravelled it becomes more complex. I'm looking forward to hearing more from the Kenneth Harrow - Moses Ochonu – Pablo Idahosa axis of discussion. I believe that they are going to tell the whole story. Some ideas will be put to the test; it promises to be interesting...
Sincerely yours,
On Friday, 8 August 2014 22:28:48 UTC+2, Anunoby, Ogugua wrote:
...CH
Please do not trivialize the serious debate on Iran and nuclear weapons. Iran is a much older and more settled country than Israel is. Iran has no territorial ambitions outside its settled borders. Israel does. Iran has never attacked any other country. Israel has. Iran made public its nuclear development program. Israel denies hers. You must not take context out of serious conversations.
Your Yoruba professor if he wished to make sense, must have meant countries/states not anomalous groups and individuals that are here today and gone tomorrow when he said "everybody".
You refer to the PLO Charter and the Hamas Covenant. What about the Israeli Constitution? What about the public and private pronouncements of Israeli and Jewish leaders and settlers? There will always be enough blame to go round. Anyone looking for trash in a trash bin will likely find some.
Israel is not going to go away. We all know this for a fact. The Palestinian Arabs must know that by now. You may be surprised to learn again that I am actually a supporter of State of Israel. That is not to say though that Israel is and will always be right and do no wrong. I call the wrongs the way I see them. Israel's occupation and land grab are arguably the two most important obstacles to peace. Let us all focus on saving lives, improving lives and having peace everywhere.
Having suffered discrimination and yearned for a state for as long as the Jewish people have, they more than any other people would be expected to understand other people's suffering and similar yearning for a state. Their suffering should grow their humanity toward their neighbors and not their hatred.
It was the humanity of the great powers of the last century that made possible the state of Israel. The people of Israel should return the favor to their suffering neighbors. The Jews are undoubtedly a great people. Their humanity should be great too.
oa
From: Cornelius Hamelberg [mailto:cornelius...@
gmail.com ]
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 2:25 AM
To: Anunoby, Ogugua
Cc: usaafric...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: FW: USA Africa Dialogue Series - In Gaza, International Law Is Up in Flames
Sir,
"the demilitarization of all direct parties in the conflict?" Your preamble sounds like my Yoruba professor talking about Iran going nuclear – he says that if Israel is "allowed" to have nuclear bombs then everybody should be allowed – everybody i.e. Boko Haram, Goodluck Jonathan, Taliban, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Hamas, al-Qaeda, IS, the late Saddam…
Throughout, you have been humane and fair but it's quite clear that you are not familiar with the goals outlined in either the PLO Charter or that of their brothers-in-arms, the Hamas Covenant.
The more sober reality is this: "If Palestine were to lay down their guns tomorrow, there would be no war. If Israel were to lay down theirs, there would be no Israel "- Benjamin Netanyahu
Gaza has been a test case – Israel withdraws and it becomes a safe haven for jihad's missiles pointing at Haifa, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.
Now Shaul Mofaz is talking about smoking out Hezbollah terror tunnels. Hopefully, he will not be crossing the border and invading Hezbollah's stronghold in Southern Lebanon on a mission of search and destroy. Hezbollah does not have any baby bombs in their new stockpile of missiles (and when I think of the civilian casualties in Lebanon's capital Beirut, I have to close my eyes and what I see is the whole world, the Arab League and Iran foaming at the mouth in indignation at the death toll...
I just read this in this morning's Dagens Nyheter (print edition): Start with Gaza and thought of you.
Another song: Put Down Your Weapon
Wishing you a pleasant weekend in peace and quiet.
Sincerely,
CH
On 8 August 2014 05:19, Anunoby, Ogugua <Anun...@lincolnu.edu> wrote:
CH,
The tragedy of Gaza, primarily a matter for the Israelis and Palestinian Arabs concerns us because of our common humanity. Excessive is excessive. Wrong is wrong. To have the right to self-defense is not to have no measure in self-defense. There may not be Israeli military boots on the ground as I write in Gaza. This does not mean that Gaza is still not crushingly occupied. Is occupation not unceasing attack?
Why should one people have the right to defend themselves and another would not? You make a case for the demilitarization of Gaza. What not a case for the demilitarization of all direct parties in the conflict? Why not a ban on arms sale to all parties in the conflict? Why not a ban on military ware production on all parties?
Israel alone cannot have a monopoly of reasonable demands. No party in a conflict usually has this monopoly. All parties do have both reasonable and unreasonable demands at the same time. This is why mediated negotiations by neutral third parties make sense and can be invaluable if all parties in conflict truly desire conflict resolution.
General Sharon as Prime Minister of Israel, realized that what Israel needed to make whole its statehood was peace with all her neighbors and not security. He knew that Israel passed the security test a long time ago. He unilaterally withdraw Israeli forces from Gaza. That decision was opposed by many members of Sharon's Likud Party at the time including Netanyahu and Feiglin. Sharon left the Likud Party. He formed a new party. The Likud Party is now in power and Netanyahu and Feiglin are senior party leaders as well as Prime Minister and Deputy Speaker of the Israel's unicameral parliament respectively. What evidence is there that both men and others in their coalition government share Sharon's vision, desire peace, and are not using the security argument as a pretext for continued occupation of Gaza and the west Bank?
Gaza would conceivably be a better place than it is now if scarce resources were not expended on military ware. Israel would be a safer place to live in, more prosperous, and less dependent on the United States if she was at peace with all her neighbors. Prosperity seldom comes to an occupied land. That is one more reason occupation is usually resisted. It must therefore be first things first. It does not make a lot of sense to purchase a stool before you have a floor to sit it.
oa
From: Cornelius Hamelberg [mailto:cornelius...@
gmail.com ]
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 7:47 PM
To: Anunoby, Ogugua
Cc: usaafric...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: FW: USA Africa Dialogue Series - In Gaza, International Law Is Up in Flames
Sir,
You must know that neither of us is against the idea of freedom for everyone, including everyone in Gaza.
In what sense is Gaza under occupation? I heard an expert say that occupation means boots on the ground. There are no Israeli boots on the ground right now. I guess that you would argue that there are Israeli boots in the air and in the bomb boats at sea and on the ready just outside the Gaza coastline, just in case.
In my view, Israel's demands are reasonable.
Here's the current situation
What does Gaza need weapons for? Imagine if the crucible Gaza had been all peace and quiet after General Sharon unilaterally withdrew every Jew from the strip, thus ending what was occupation. Imagine if all the money on rockets, missiles, suicide vests and terror tunnels had been invested in education, health, and agriculture – wouldn't Gaza be a model little land in the whole of the Middle East?
Is that was is likely to happen if Israel were to totally lift the blockade and leave the Hamas government to their own devices or are we likely to see weapons flying in like never before, by land, sea and air, "in order to liberate the West Bank". That is the question. If only Hamas would be willing to give that undertaking to renounce terror - no bombs, no terror indoctrination of children, why would there be a blockade, why would there be war and not peace?
On 8 August 2014 00:30, Anunoby, Ogugua <Anun...@lincolnu.edu> wrote:
"What would happen - or, more directly , how would you feel if year after year a bunch of Christian terrorist nut heads in Waco, Kansas State kept on firing their primitive missiles (primitive by US military standards ) at the Pentagon?" .
ch
I refer you to your assertion below on the "pitfalls inherent in making analogies". It seems to me that it is a grossly misleading simplification to try to understand Hamas' resistance to Israeli occupation by referencing a hypothetical "Christian terrorist" group in Kansas State. Palestinian Arabs are under a brutal Israeli occupation and continue to lose their land, and lives. Your "Christian terrorist" are not, and never likely to.
Hamas has a legitimate case in the minds of many Palestinian people, and many non-Palestinian people paying attention. Al Qaeda is a violent group in search of a cause. Hamas is a political party with a military wing fighting the occupation of her homeland. Al Qaeda is nothing of the sort.
Hamas duly won an election that was forced on her. The proponents and some critical supporters of that election rejected the result. One would have thought that they would accept it and work with Hamas. Depending on their outcome, democratic elections in Palestine can be an encumbrance for some people and governments.
Hamas militancy is mostly a reaction to extant and continuing circumstance. Many people seem to have forgotten why Hamas came into existence. Remove the circumstance and enabling conditions and Hamas in its present form, will be surplus to requirement. Hamas uses the occupation to justify her existence. Israeli occupation has become Hamas' most effective recruitment tool. Many Israelis know this to be so.
<span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-
family:"Ca
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment