Fadi Zaghmout

Responses

1. 

   mohammad

   September 8, 2006

   we already tried peace , what did it bring us !! only pain and suffering , and kids getting shot in the streets ,women getting raped and kicked out of there houses , as much as i respect al mahatma ghandi , this won’t work for us, in there case it was 35000000 against 100000 , so that’s why it worked , and for your comment on who hindu never shot one bullet , well , they did shot hundreds of muslims , and muslims did the same ofcourse . al mahatma was a wise man , but if he was alive at the moment he would say that the only way we can get our independence back is fighting back . plus there’s one last thing , they were fighting a civilized nation , but we are fighting a bunch of idiots with a lot of power and money , and that’s more dangerous .

   LikeLike

2. 

   Anon

   September 8, 2006

   The Myth Of Gandhi And Palestinian RealityBy Ali Abunimah 09 September 2004The Electronic IntifadaThe recent visit of Mohandas K. Gandhi’s grandson, Arun Gandhi, to Palestine has sparked new discussion about the role of nonviolence in the Palestinian struggle for freedom. In a speech before the Palestinian Legislative Council, Gandhi called upon 50,000 Palestinian refugees to march back home en masse from their exile in Jordan, forcing the Israelis to choose between relenting to a wave of people power, or gunning the marchers down in cold blood.In an editorial, the English-language Jordan Times gently endorsed the idea, arguing: “Perhaps it’s time for the world to accept that the refugees need to have a say in their own fate. Perhaps it’s time for them to make their voices heard. Perhaps they should march.” However, the newspaper also warned that such tactics could lead to “losses to the Kingdom,” and recalled Israel’s harsh military retaliation against Jordan and Lebanon when the Palestinian Liberation Organization used those countries as bases.While one can admire Mohandas Gandhi’s nonviolent principles, one can hardly point to the Indian experience as a demonstration of their usefulness in overthrowing a colonial regime. Indeed, Gandhi’s concepts of satyagraha, or soul power, and ahimsa, or nonviolent struggle, played an important role during the Indian independence struggle, however the anti-colonial period in India was also marked by extreme violence, both between the British and Indians and between different Indian communal groups. Anti-colonial Indians committed a wide variety of terrorist acts; the British government was responsible for numerous massacres and other atrocities; and communal violence before, during and after independence claimed the lives of millions of people. One simply cannot argue that Indian independence was achieved in a nonviolent context.Nevertheless, the fact that the Palestinian leadership has never seriously sought to use mass, organized nonviolence is yet another example of its monumental lack of creativity. Imagine, for example, if the Palestinian president, Yasser Arafat, instead of abjectly and unsuccessfully begging his Israeli captors to allow him to attend the Christmas services at Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity last year, had simply announced he would walk there without their permission, and invited all the people of Ramallah, international figures, clergymen, and the world’s press, to walk with him? What if Palestinian ministers slept in and defended with their bodies the houses and farms of their people, slated for demolition or seizure by Israel?We had a tantalizing glimpse of the potential power of such action on the bittersweet day the late minister Faisal Husseini was buried in June 2001, when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians flooded into occupied Jerusalem, and Israel was powerless to stop them. For those brief hours the people made Jerusalem free and whole.The call for nonviolent resistance by Palestinians has also been taken up in Israel, although more disingenuously. Yoel Esteron, a columnist and former managing editor at Ha’aretz, lauded Arun Gandhi in a recent column, and wondered, “what would have happened if four years ago the Palestinians had chosen passive resistance?” Esteron lectured the Palestinians: “It is worth it to them to choose Gandhi’s way. And it is worth it to us. If the Palestinians stop committing suicide on our buses, this will be a more effective weapon than explosive belts … Ostensibly, the key rests in the hands of the stronger side. Wrong. If Israel were to lay down its weapons, it would be forced to pick them up again after a few murderous terror attacks … The key is in the Palestinians’ hands.”While apparently embracing Arun Gandhi’s call for nonviolent actions, Esteron would not actually want Palestinians to act on Gandhi’s suggestion that refugees return home in force. Esteron has argued forcefully that the refugees must give up their right of return. Nor is it necessary to wonder, as Esteron does, what would have happened had the Palestinians opted to engage in nonviolent resistance. From 1987 to 1993, during the first intifada, they did exactly that. And despite it all, their mass protests and strikes were met with brutal repression. Israel did not have bus bombings to use as an excuse for its retaliation, since the first bus attack occurred in 1994.While the first uprising that began in 1987 shifted international public opinion toward the Palestinians, it did not result in gains on the ground. According to the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem, from the beginning of the first intifada in 1987 until the signing of the Oslo Accords in September 1993, Palestinians killed a total of 100 Israeli civilians, half of them inside the Occupied Territories. During the same period, Israeli occupation forces and settlers killed more than 1,160 Palestinian civilians. The Israeli answer to what was then a largely peaceful mass uprising was what is commonly referred to in Israel as “the appropriate and Zionist response” – the violent confiscation of more land and the building of ever more settlements.The present conflict preserves this gross imbalance, where the victims of violence are overwhelmingly Palestinian, but at far higher levels of violence all around. The conflict is also increasingly characterized by nonviolence, even if this remains invisible to most Israelis and to the world’s media. For Palestinians, circumventing barriers and checkpoints in order to get to school, to work, or simply to visit family or worship, is a daily act of resistance. The recent hunger strike by thousands of Palestinian prisoners and their families was another example that was largely ignored internationally. The wire services carried dozens of photographs of silent vigils and protests by prisoners’ families, but few of those made it into newspapers.On 30 August, China’s Xinhua news agency reported the death of 55-year-old Aisha al-Zaban. She had been on hunger strike for 12 days in solidarity with her imprisoned son and his comrades. Doctors had advised her to end her fast, but she refused and died of a heart attack. I was unable to find her name in any of the dozens of American newspapers that routinely echo the calls for Palestinians to follow the way of Gandhi.It is important to distinguish between those like Arun Gandhi and the Palestinians with whom he is in dialogue, who are genuinely seeking new and creative ways to energize the freedom struggle; and those like Esteron, whose calls for nonviolence are simply another bankrupt exercise in shifting the blame from the occupier to the occupied, while still posing as advocates for peace.Ali Abunimah is a co-founder of The Electronic Intifada. This article first appeared in The Daily Star

   LikeLike

3. 

   The Observer

   September 8, 2006

   Mohd, when did we truely tried peace? Are you referring to the peace negotiations between Palestinians and Israeli’s in the 90’s?I don’t know whether this is fortunate or unfortunate for us, but our so called enemies whether they are Israel or the USA are percieved to be more civilized than us in the eyes of the world. I dont think that Britain was anymore civilized back then when Ghandi fought peacefully for the freedom of India. He has been asked once if he would use the same strategy if it was Hitler they were dealing with, and he said yes. We can achieve a lot by peaceful means. We have just to stick to it, and work upon it.What threatens us not only the Israeli state, or the US policy in the middle east, but also those terror organizations that abuse our race and religion. We have to fight them all in peaceful means to regain our image as a civilized nation.

   LikeLike

4. 

   mohammad

   September 8, 2006

   ok , i’ll take it point by point : “”when did we truely tried peace?””we’ve always tried peace, lets take the recent actions in lebenon , hassan nasr allah said that if they stoped shooting bombs and missils on lebenon he will stop the resistence too , and what did they say ?? they said NO , we don not negotiate with terorrists ,actully he said this “what can’t be resolved by power can be resolved by more power”, and that is his answer to everything , just fighting , lets take another example , king husain (R.I.P) suggested a non-violent solution to the problems in palestine , and again they said “no thanks”, ofcourse later on they changed their minds and did a treaty but it was by there rules .“”our so called enemies whether they are Israel or the USA are percieved to be more civilized than us in the eyes of the world.”” :no there not , it used to be right 10 years ago but not anymore , now everyone in the meddle east/europe/africa/russia/amd even america now the injustice that is talking place in here , ofcourse am talking about educated civilians .“”I dont think that Britain was anymore civilized back then when Ghandi fought peacefully for the freedom of India”” : yes they were , there was something called was ethics , and in all the years they staied in india , only a few hundreds of people died , that’s less that the deaths in palestine and lebenon in the last 3 year alone . and about fighting hitler with peace , i mean com’on , i do have great respect for al mahatma , but it would’ve never worked , and by the way , britin got out for only one reason , they got what they wanted and they found that staying there will not bring them any good so they got out , not becasue of the resistence .i only have one last thing to say , occupation NEVER worked , and palestine was occupied 7 times through history and everytime they kicked them out . and sooner or later palestine will be free again .

   LikeLike

5. 

   The Observer

   September 9, 2006

   Mohammad, Do you consider Hezbollah actions recently in Lebanon is trying peace?!!! How can you say we tried peaceful means! Hezbollah fought back the Israelis, they fought with weapons! That isn’t a peaceful means. Had they give back the prisoners and raise their voices to the UN and the free world, things would have been handled in a different way. Maybe we wouldn’t be re-building lebanon now as we speak.Unfortunatly I can’t disagree more with you about who the world see more civilized us or the Israelis or the Americans. Our image is getting worse each day. Peope around the world align us with the terrorists because they kill people with the name of our religion and our God. The world as a whole is more civilized now than of the period Ghandi fought. We can achieve much more in peacful ways by addressing the hearts and minds of people around the world. We can do nothing if we didn’t save our image first. Let us work in joining back the other nations of the world. We should not let our bitterness drive us in the hatred lane. We can show the world that we can accept the others by borrowing a role model of another culture. It can work. Ghandi can save us.

   LikeLike

6. 

   mohammad

   September 9, 2006

   i am really sorry about what happened in lebenon , but perhapse you didn’t see what was happening in gaza just before the hizballah operation , they were bombing schools and electristy sources , and mr. hassan didn’t do what he did for the prisoners ONLY , he wanted to releve the pressure from gaza , and god know’s what would’ve happened if he didn’t do that .and dude trust me , i live in jordan now but i’ve been to europe and australia , and the people they all know what’s happening , and i have alot of friends from canada,and even latin america , and they know , media used to block the news from this region , but now anymore , it’s becasue some arabs are working outside and gaining power , and some media stations now ar owned by arabs .

   LikeLike

7. 

   The Observer

   September 10, 2006

   It is good to know that the rest of the world can get the other side of the story. This is the right way to do so, by using media stations own by Arabs. Why don’t we use those stations to clear our image?

   LikeLike

8. 

   mohammad

   September 10, 2006

   “” Why don’t we use those stations to clear our image? “”we are but it needs time to be done , we can’t change people minds in a day or two , it needs time , keep in mind that people there started reading about how the arabs are animals since they were kids , so some of them won’t change there minds but the younger generation are more accepting .

   LikeLike