Aug 052010
Once again Ray Hanania, the Arab-American comedian, Jerusalem Post (JP) columnist, and newest ADC board of directors member who does not speak Arabic, addresses the Arab-Israeli conflict within the context of family tales (real or imagined) and marriage to a Jewish woman. The latest Hanania household episode involves his wife’s insistence that he sits down with his son and has a discussion about sex. We can ignore Ray’s fatherly discussion of the Birds and the Bees and the lame attempts at humor that pepper his writing, but we do recommend those concerned with his son’s education have a talk with Ray himself. What should not be ignored is some of the more serious and troubling assertions made by this Palestinian-American regarding the past and present history of Palestine and the Arab-Zionist conflict.In this latest episode we find Ray telling his son “Arabs and Jews are basically the same. We’re both human beings. People. We just believe in different things.” I told him mommy and I have an armistice agreement, which was harder to explain than sex. “Mommy is the boss in our family, but I make all the decisions.”
While the first part of that quote is obviously true, the second half was probably an attempt at humor. This has become a rather standard format for Hanania’s articles which often appear along side Daniel Pipe’s own articles with the JP inserting their photos next to each other as they appear at the time of this writing. We’re not sure what the purpose of Ray’s constant reference to his marriage to a Jewish woman has to do with the conflict in Palestine, but it appears certain he believes his personal status provides him with unique insight which he wants to convey to readers.
As Ray’s alleged fatherly attempt to explain sex to his son evolved into a discussion about the conflict in Palestine he told his son “There was this country, Palestine. The Jews lived there. Then the Arabs lived there. Then Jews came back. Then they started to fight over who owns the land. Both sides did bad things to each other and everyone just got madder.” Once again we see Ray adopting the Zionist narrative with two major empirically verifiable, historical inaccuracies. First, the original inhabitants of Palestine were the Canaanites, an Arab group that descended upon the land from the Eastern Shores of the Arabian Peninsula and spoke an ancient Arabic tongue. The Torah itself, which is not a history book, does not dispute this historical fact. The Philistines, who originated in the island of Crete, came to Palestine and melted into the Canaanites and the land of Canaan became known as Palestine. It is true the ancient Hebrew tribes were part of the region, but their presence in Palestine was transient and short-lived. Therefore, contrary to the Zionist lie that Arabs came to Palestine with the rise of Islam, the land of Canaan, later Palestine, has been, since time immemorial, inhabited by Arabs. The Arab claim to the land is not based on a religious imperative pursued as an article of faith nor is it a mythical deed issued from the heavens carrying God’s signature as grantor.
Successive waves of invaders (mostly foreign) and immigrants (mostly from the Arabian Peninsula) either left or were absorbed by the original inhabitants and never altered the Arab identity of Palestine. It is the Palestinian Arabs who were the original inhabitants of the land, a fact which did not prevent Hanania from repeating the Zionist lie that the “Jews lived there. Then the Arabs lived there.” This history provides the Palestinians with an even more legitimate claim to being the descendants of the ancient Hebrews themselves than the modern European Jews who colonized Palestine, which also belies the second Zionist claim Hanania repeats that the “Jews came back.” The assertion that European Jews who colonized Palestine are descendants of the ancient Hebrews is nonsense with no basis (racist eugenics aside) in serious historical inquiry. Furthermore, even if such fantastical claims, which are solely articles of faith, had any basis in truth, it would not justify the Jews “coming back” and ethnically cleansing the original inhabitants of Palestine who were there before them, and never left.
As we saw in our previous articles on Hanania, he has a habit of blaming both sides. He did it again when he told his son “Both sides did bad things to each other” so he must still believe this makes him sound balanced and even-handed. Nothing can be further from the truth. Not only is there no comparison between the level and scope of “bad things” (violence) that has been inflicted on the Palestinians and the Israelis, more importantly, there is no moral equivalence between the violence of the occupier and the resistance of the occupied.
The conflict in Palestine does not involve two competing narratives, both of which contain some truth that deserves to be considered as a legitimate point of view. There is an objective truth. There is an historical truth regarding the ancient history of Palestine and there is a truth as far as the modern day conflict is concerned, and this ancient and modern empirical truth stands stubbornly on the side of the Palestinian Arabs. Those of us who are not pursuing a failed comedy career in the US and are not interested in a Chicago-area radio show, a column in the JP, or a position on the National Board of the lousy ADC have no reason to not speak the truth. We see no historical or rational justification to entertain the absurd notion there is a legitimate “debate” about who owns the land. Although we understand why an Arab-American might feel compelled to engage in such nonsense while living in the US, we certainly don’t, and we will not allow Zionist propaganda to masquerade as a serious academic or historical debate nor an alternative viewpoint. For the oppressed Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from their homeland through mass violence by European colonizers and who continue to suffer under occupation and in refugee camps, stating the simple, objective truth is the least we can do. Those who are not willing to do so can do us all a favor and ikhras.
After a couple of more typically lame attempts at humor, Ray’s supposed discussion about sex ends up with his son asking him “How about sharing? Mommy tells me to do that all the time. If you and mommy get along, why can’t Arabs and Jews get along?” What Ray Hanania did not tell his son is that Arabs and Jews have lived together in relative harmony centuries before Daddy married Mommy. It is only with the advent of Zionism and the violent conquest of Palestine by European colonial-settlers that relations deteriorated. In fact, I would tell Ray that Arabs and Jews have gotten along atleast as well as him and his wife.
Post Script – Ray used a new Arabic word in his latest article, he said, “Yaani [like, in Arabic] this and yaani that.” Ray, of course, does not speak Arabic, but instead of admitting it, he’s trying hard to create the impression he does. He can easily prove us wrong. We’re not asking him to read a passage from the Holy Quran or recite any of the Mu’alaqqat, but just a short dialogue in Arabic is all we’re asking for. C’mon Ray, if you speak Arabic you don’t have to ikhras. You have a radio show. Let us hear it.
Uprooted Palestinian
1 comment:
This reminds me of the joke about the Palestinian boy whose father decided that rather than tell him about the birds and the bees, to send him to the neighbouring Jewish doctor. The doctor saw it an opportunity to have more than a few sessions, but one day in the absence of the doctor, his wife told the boy she could offer better help. Anyhow, to cut a long story short, a few weeks later, the doctor came across the boy in a park and asked him how well he was doing, the boy replied "what your wife has between her legs is infinitely superior to what you have between the ears"!!! Perhaps, Ray should see the wife for advice!
Post a Comment