by davidrobertlewis -

Palestinian academics condemn Abbas Holocaust statement

In response to recent statements by President Mahmoud Abbas, a group of Palestinians have​ released an open letter:

We the undersigned, Palestinian academics, writers, artists, activists, and people of all walks of life, unequivocally condemn the morally and politically reprehensible comments made by President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas about the Holocaust. Rooted in a racial theory widespread in European culture and science at the time, the Nazi genocide of the Jewish people was born of antisemitism, fascism, and racism. We adamantly reject any attempt to diminish, misrepresent, or justify antisemitism, Nazi crimes against humanity, or historical revisionism vis-a-vis the Holocaust.

The Palestinian people are sufficiently burdened by Israeli settler colonialism, dispossession, occupation, and oppression without having to bear the negative effect of such ignorant and profoundly antisemitic narratives perpetuated by those who claim to speak in our name. We are also burdened by the PA’s increasingly authoritarian and draconian rule, which disproportionately impacts those living under occupation. Having held onto power nearly a decade and a half after his presidential mandate expired in 2009, supported by Western and pro-Israel forces seeking to perpetuate Israeli apartheid, Abbas and his political entourage have forfeited any claim to represent the Palestinian people and our struggle for justice, freedom, and equality, a struggle that stands against all forms of systemic racism and oppression.

Rashid Khalidi — Sherene Seikaly — Tareq Baconi — Muhammad Ali Khalidi — Zaha Hassan — Noura Erakat — Raja Shehadeh — Isabella Hammad — Lana Tatour — Nadia Abu El-Haj — Bashir Abu-Manneh — Raef Zreik — Leena Dallasheh — Lila Abu Lughod — Kareem Rabie — Mezna Qato — Amahl Bishara — Dana El Kurd — Nadia Hijab — Samera Esmeir — Ahmad Samih Khalidi — Abdel Razzaq Takriti — Maha Nassar — Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian — Huwaida Arraf — Rosemary Sayigh — Areej Sabbagh-Khoury — Tamara Ben-Halim — Yezid Sayigh — Jumana Manna — Nadim Bawalsa — Yousef Munayyer — Omar Qattan — Ismail Nashef — Nu’man Kanfani — Himmat Zoubi — Shahd Hammouri — Hamzé Attar — Hana Sleiman — Haithem El-Zabri — Samir Sinijlawi — Mussa’ab Bashir — Sam Bahour — Huda Al Imam — Bashir Bashir — Joey Ayoub — Michel Khleifi — Layth Malhis — Abdalhadi Alijla — Anis Mohsen — Karam Dana — Omar Dajani — Ubai Aboudi — Issam Nassar — Bassam Massarwa — Zaina Arekat — Bahaa Shahera Rauf — May Seikaly — Jerry Jareer Khoury — Rania Madi — Wesam Ahmad — Refaat Alareer — Omar Jabary Salamanca — Mona Hewaydi — Y. L. Al-Sheikh — Yasmeen Hamdan — Emilio Dabed — Ines Abdel Razek — Basheer Karkabi — Majed Abusalama — Leila Farsakh — Yazan Khalili — Moien Odeh — Hilary Rantisi — Tariq Raouf — Aimee Shalan — Nadia Khalilieh — Linda Kateeb — Bassam Dally — Zahi Khamis — Sami Jiries — Razzan Quran — Nour Salman — Jamal Rayyis — Izzeddin Araj — Tarek Ismail — Susan Muaddi Darraj — Basman Derawi — Rawan Arraf — Asad Ghanem — Assad Abdi — Umayyah Cable — Fahad Ali — Samar Dahleh — Ayman Nijim — Jumana Musa — Miryam Rashid — Helga Tawil-Souri — Leila Shahid — Leena Barakat — Nadia Saah — Hana Masud — Asma Al-Naser — Diana Buttu — Selma Dabbagh — Rana Issa — Riyad Khoury — Nasser Saleh — Said Abu Mualla — Haneen Zoabi — Muayad Alayan — Afnann Egbaria — Khaled Karkabi — Jaber Suleiman — Tarif Khalidi — Pelican Mourad — Ibrahim Fraihat — Basel Ghattas — Wisam Gibran — Fathi Marshood — Radi Suudi — Ahmed Abofoul — Omar Barghouti — Abdelhamid Siyam — Noor A’wad — Lara Elborno — Areen Hawari — Liyana Kayali — Nadia Naser-Najab — Kamal Aljafari — Anthony Broumana — Seema Hejazi — Fady Joudah — Samah Sabawi — Ramy Al-Asheq — Yousef Abu Warda — Khalil Sayegh — Nadim Khoury — Waseem Abu Mehadi — Jonathan Kuttab — Line Khateeb — Abdellatif Rayan — George Abed — Khalil Shikaki — Diana Alzeer — Lena Khalaf Tuffaha — Nadim Rouhana — Bassam Shihada — Hiba Husseini — Majed Kayali — Nahed Schäffer-Awwad — Burhan Ghanayem — Loubna Turjuman — Abeer Al-Najjar — Naseer Aboushi — Yasmeen Daher — Siman Khoury — Amani Barakat — Dimah Habash — George Bisharat — Walid Afifi — Hasan Hammami — Khalil Hindi — Akram Baker — Margaret Zaknoen DeReus — Mazen Masri — Tanya Keilani — Marzuq Al-Halabi — Hanan Toukan — Abdelnasser Rashid — Fadya Salfiti — M. Muhannad Ayyash — Yasser Abdrabbou — Maurice Ebileeni — Rashida Tlaib — Lina Qamar — Oraib Toukan — Rima I Anabtawi — Emad Salem — Mona Khalidi — Mohammed Said Samhouri — Raja G Khoury — Sara Husseini — Nasser Mashni — Jawadat Abu El-Haj — Norma M. Rantisi — Ann Shirazi — Ahmad Shirazi — Suheil Nammari — Nafez Abo-Elreich — Moosa Omar — Karem Sakallah — Farouq R Shafie — Mahmoud Muna — Izzat Darwazeh — Awni Daibes — Nadeem Karkabi — Ra’fat Sub Laban — Lina Ramadan — Gabriel Mifsud — Khaled Hamida — Basma Al-Sharif — Ali Mansour — Falestin Naili — Manar H. Makhoul — Nabil Armaly — Hassan F Hamed — Waleed Karkabi — Nada Elia — Abed Azzam — Hassane Karkar — Ben Jamal

by davidrobertlewis -

BRICS, a boondoggle of dictators, homophobes & outright misogynists.

LAST MONTH Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE were invited to join a grouping of ‘top emerging economies’ known as BRICS dreamt up by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill. The only thing linking the bloc previously was their economic status. Nowadays, the addition of six new members, appears to add weight to the notion that the club is less an economic convenience than a means for these nations to escape pressure from Western values which emphasise elections and human rights.

While Argentina is a democracy, the other new additions are not. Ethiopia’s authoritarian one-party system has largely excluded the public from genuine political participation, while the UAE has been described as a “tribal autocracy” where the ‘seven constituent monarchies are led by tribal rulers in an autocratic fashion’. There are no democratically elected institutions, and there is no formal commitment to free speech.

Saudi Arabia on the other hand is an absolute monarchy. According to the Basic Law of Saudi Arabia, the country’s de facto constitution adopted by royal decree in 1992, the king must comply with Sharia law and the Qur’an. With neighbouring Iran competing as an oppressive theocracy called the “Islamic Republic,” with a religious “Supreme Leader” overseeing all aspects of Iranian life.

This month marks one year since Mahsa Amini died in the custody of the Iranian morality police, setting off mass protests. Authorities continue to quell any new unrest. UN experts in March expressed outrage at the deliberate poisoning of more than 1200 schoolgirls in Iran’s major cities by a regime intent on maintaining religious strictures against women who are forced to wear the Hijab.

Despite the threat of arrest, millions of Iranian women actively oppose the hijab, wearing it loosely around their heads or on their shoulders.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in Saudi Arabia face severe repression and legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents. LGBT rights are not recognized by the government of Saudi Arabia. Both male and female same-sex sexual activity is illegal. In Iran, LGBT face the death penalty. In Ethopia homosexuality is criminalized under the country’s penal code,

The newcomers for the most part lack universal rights for minority groups. In Saudi Arabia, Jews are restricted from practising their religion in public and the country bans non-Muslims from entering the city of Mecca.

In contrast, Iran’s Jewish community is officially recognized as a religious minority group by the government, and, like Zoroastrians and Christians, are allocated one seat in the Iranian Parliament.

by davidrobertlewis -

Behold, I am Malema the Mighty, bow before my absolutist, authoritarian glory

AS EFF SUPREMO Julius Malema rose from the decks of an elevator platform within the FNB soccer stadium, showered with pop-star confetti before 94 000 of his supporters, he was echoing another stadium-size political event which had occurred in Russia to mark the anniversary of an authoritarian — Vladimir Putin’s ‘special military operation’ celebration in Moscow.

Like the dictator Putin, Malema views himself as the prodigal heir to a former colonial Empire. In many respects the two politicos are cut from the same cloth — Juju as he is often affectionately known — is an ardent fan of policies which have seen war resisters imprisoned, gay rights activists jailed, and media outlets banned.

The well-orchestrated EFF fanfare came barely a week since his party platformed an openly misogynist, and homophobic speaker, Prof PLO Lumumba.

Amidst the sheen of festive excess to mark the party’s 10th anniversary, a thin veneer of Africanism and decolonial rhetoric faceted over Malema’s ultra-nationalist policies, which would entail wholesale nationalisation, ‘expropriation of land without compensation’, and seizure of businesses and property at the behest of reracialisation, ‘revolution and revenge’ against white citizens.

The circus event touting a command economy — another self-abnegating Marxist dynasty much like North Korea’s Kim dynasty — occurred within the oval of a stadium sponsored by a large South African financial institution — one of several which the grandiloquent leader wants to nationalise. It is one of many contradictory policy facts ignored by Malema’s critics, who also point out the party, which claims membership of 1 million supporters, represents barely a 3rd of the country’s over 30-million electorate.

Still, the third largest political grouping in South Africa, borrowed heavily from Putin’s United Russia Party and its contempt for the media, and has sought funding from oligarchs such as Adriano Mazzotti, a confessed tobacco smuggler, seemingly immune from prosecution under the current government.

Leading a chant of “Kill the Boer” a song which has “sparked pushback in both South Africa and the United States“, most notably from South African-born billionaire Elon Musk, reignited debate about a “controversial decades-old tune that dates back to the struggle against apartheid”.

It is doubtful whether the threatening words are appropriate to peacetime and the 21st century? Such criticism was however met with derision from across the spectrum of black social media, with many persons of colour, eager to normalise the equivalent of waving around the old Republic flag.

Yet Malema’s open endorsements of the violent sentiments behind the fringe song popularised by the late Peter Mokaba — which is anything but metaphorical in this context, nor even lyrical for that matter — is uncomfortably close to an outright call for civil war, and needs to be seen against his earlier statements this year, urging followers to ‘not be afraid of murdering in the name of revolution’.

Later at an amply funded black-tie shindig, sponsored by his right-wing capitalist associates (read fawning opportunists), Malema sung the praises of erstwhile and current benefactors, whilst cautioning his guests that he was ‘ruthless when it came to dissent within the ranks of his own party.’

The comments were apparently aimed at his second-in-command Floyd Shivambo.

by davidrobertlewis -

LUMUMBABWE: EFF host to a misogynist, homophobe in PLO Professor

IN A SPEECH littered with offensive references to ‘men’ and ‘man’ that ignored the substantial role played by African women, both during the struggle against apartheid, and the fight against colonialism, Prof PLO Lumumba gave students a one-sided sermon on African history, that avoided her-story. Outside the largely, empty Sara Baartman hall, EFF martials assaulted several LGBT protesters. This in front of a massive crowd of gatherers from the LGBT community which included students, academic staff and allies, who waved Rainbow flags, and sang songs.

Former ANC MP Vytjie Mentor, appeared embarrassed, as she addressed several news teams covering the event, wearing dark shades and avoiding eye contact. She claimed the organisation was ‘not responsible’ for the views of its guests, even though inside, Lumumba’s speech was being met by loud clapping and even applause by EFF supremo, Julius Malema.

It was Malema who had only months earlier marched on the Ugandan embassy, claiming Yoweri Museveni, the Ugandan president was seeking “to use the anti-homosexuality bill against his political opposition”.

Now eager to appear straight, monogamous and even liberal, Malema orchestrated a flipflopping equivocation, joining other EFF staff in trotting out chicanery — what was once the preserve of the traditional far-right. Yes, you heard that right, the liberal “marketplace of ideas”. Malema’s sophistry translates into a disclaimer that the professor’s views are merely ‘his own opinions with which one may agree or disagree’.

Would he be so accommodating if his guest were an outright religious conservative who thinks abortion-on-demand is murder? A white supremacist who believes black persons are inferior?

Trouble with such an expedient and calculated viewpoint, is that anti-hate speech clauses in our Constitution limit speech that is ‘hateful, incitement to violence and propaganda for war’.

The SCA had earlier this month dismissed an EFF application for leave to appeal an interdict , brought , to restrain the party from ‘inciting people to invade private property’. The leader of the red berets however, has escaped several applications brought regarding hate-speech.

The most obvious case being a highly publicised action by Afriforum against various “Kill the Boer” statements. One can only remark that if the boot was on the other foot, would our justice system think differently? There is certainly double-standards at play.

Our country’s enfeebled justice system thus appears to have moved the bar of hate speech, shifting the burden of evidence onto applicants, who are now forced to prove actual harm. The infamous Jon Qwalane case, in which a former Sunday Times columnist was found guilty of homophobic statements by the SAHRC for equating homosexuality with bestiality, was thus overturned on appeal by the SCA in 2021, ‘because nobody died as a result‘.

It is unclear whether the SCA’s obtuse and frankly, outrageous ruling extends to recent statements made by Prof Lumumba, to the effect that LGBT persons should also face the death penalty? Should hate speech, or speech clearly aimed at overthrowing our own democratic system, and the values it purports to uphold, be protected?

Can one really campaign for South Africa to be replaced by Lumumbabwe?

by admin -

June Media threads

These past weeks have seen several media items worth of our consideration. I flag them here to remind readers that Medialternatives still cares about these issues:

GLOBAL NEWS

BRICS Circus

President Ramaphosa made a bizarre trip to Ukraine and Russia, attempting to broker a peace deal, resulting in an incident in Poland, and then quickly superseded by the Wagner rebellion.

Putin may now skip the controversial BRICS summit.

Pundits like Patrick Bond are warning that an expanded BRICS would result in less influence for the country

LOCAL NEWS

IOL finds 10 news subs under the bed

The spat between IOL and Media24 appears to have escalated with two new inhouse opinion pieces criticising another company circulated widely on twitter by CEO Iqbal Surve. They are notable for the way in which they attack other daily press outlets, fail to acknowledge previous criticism by Medialternatives, and for their bizarre attempts to maintain a semblance of editorial distance. The latest piece published yesterday even carries the nom-de-plum of one ” J. Edwards” , apparently a person who “requests anonymity in order to prevent his/her writing from interfering with his/her regular responsibilities.”

Koos Bekker – Unveiling the elephant in the newsroom

Naspers and Media24 must face their apartheid legacy

Damning indictment of JSC in Judge Motata case

Supreme Court of Appeal ruling on Judge Motata a damning indictment of the JSC

Mayor comes out in support of LGBT

An obscure political party demands removal of the Green Point rainbow crossing. But so did a larger party last year, the ACDP, the same picture was used in both stories.

Politician calls on mayor to remove LGBTQ+ rainbow from Cape Town road

EFF dragged over LGBT flipflop

Over 100 UCT staff and students signed a petition to stop the EFF Lumumba lecture

by davidrobertlewis -

US historical relations with South Africa are being mischaracterised by Putin propagandists

RONALD REAGAN’S REPUBLICAN USA may have been a tough nut to deal with during the 80s, but harping on about the perceived slight caused by his party’s treatment of Nelson Mandela, whom they Republicans’ labelled a ‘terrorist’, ignores the substantial contribution of many other personalities from within the ranks of the Democrats and broader American civil rights movement.

Personages such as Dr.Martin Luther King Jr., late John F Kennedy, the late Robert F Kennedy, the Reverend Jesse Jackson and UN ambassador Andrew Young, demonstrate the enormous USA impact which ultimately boosted the anti-apartheid movement (AAM) both within and outside the country.

The first American political leader to show genuine interest in South Africa was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. By the time of Senator Kennedy’s visit in 1966, Dr. King had publicly linked the Civil Rights Movement in the United States and the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.

“Our responsibility presents us with a unique opportunity. We can join in the one form of non-violent action that could bring freedom and justice to South Africa – the action which African leaders have appealed for – in a massive movement for economic sanctions.” Martin Luther King’s London address 1963

It was this democratic movement for universal rights which formed the basis for the anti-apartheid movement, a movement whose historical trajectory spans decades of progressive extra-parliamentary activism and whose aims were far broader than the narrow ideological constraints of party politics.

Robert F. Kennedy’s historic visit to South Africa in 1966, remains one of the most important visits by an American during the worst years of apartheid. As Senator Kennedy’s address at the University of Witwatersrand and meeting with Albert Luthuli, shows, he was a strong advocate for liberty, equality, human dignity, democracy, human rights and justice.

Later it was Andrew Young whose trip to SA in 1977 first raised the spectre of serious economic pressure on the apartheid government and ushered in a sanctions campaign which did more to liberate the country than any Russian-supplied weapons and Soviet-style rhetoric.

The Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 was thus a law enacted by the United States Congress. The law imposed sanctions against South Africa and stated ‘five preconditions for lifting the sanctions’ that would essentially end the system of apartheid.

It is an historical fact that the conclusion to apartheid and white minority rule came as the result of broad economic pressure and that the military campaign at the behest of MK and others, at the end of the day, played a rather minor role.

Partisan propagandists stuck inside Cold War rhetoric forget that Paul Robeson’s American Committee on Africa (ACOA) was the first major group devoted to the anti-apartheid movement, and predate the later boycott movement formed in 1959.

Later incarnations played an equally important part, with the result evolving into the African Growth and Opportunity Act of 2000, which lowered trade barriers by lowering tariffs, and providing economic opportunities and incentives.

It would be a shame to see South Africa lose its beneficial trade status in exchange for appeasement of a Russian dictator opposed to the democracy and civil rights we take for granted? It is no secret that Putin’s United Russia Party is opposed to LGBTIQ rights, and perceives the conquest of Ukraine as a colonial and imperial endeavour.

In 1984, TransAfrica became a founding member of what it termed the Free South Africa Movement resulting in demonstrations on US campuses. While supportive of UN resolutions against apartheid, and the chief supplier of weapons during the conflict, Russia played a marginal role and absolutely no part in the transition process. In fact it was the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, and end of the USSR in 1991 which brought a wave of democracy and freedom  across Eastern Europe, whose impact is still felt in South Africa today.

by davidrobertlewis -

Reflections on Freedom & Workers Day 2023

FREEDOM DAY is a monument to majority rule under an inclusive democratic system that relegated previous attempts to segregate the franchise according to skin colour. We no longer have to look over our shoulders for the special branch, nor worry about spooks under our beds, and any comparisons with the apartheid regime immediately demonstrate that we are a far more open, transparent and freer society than people like BJ Vorster and JG Strydom could ever have imagined.

But for all the blather over the weekend, speech after speech on worker’s rights and the ruling party’s suppose success in ruling, our President came across like a maître d’ asylum, the manager of a mental ward covering up for the lateness in supplying the main course to a bunch of rowdy inmates — economic freedom (read equal opportunity) is so past overdue that it would not an overstatement, if I remarked, ‘the dish is already cold’ — practically any party promising alternatives to the failed ‘developmental model’ being offered up as the sole option on the table by the ANC, has a pretty good chance at it, come the 2024 general election.

This past 12 months have seen a veritable smorgasbord of trouble besetting the party, which which like the NP ‘volkscapitalisme‘ — sheltered employment and state maximalism of yore — has become synonymous with the fate of the country, leading many to assume a permanent mandate, as if our nation’s mixed economy were under command much like China and its CCP, and our destiny is to be ranked, not alongside democracy but the rather the autocracies of the world.

From the release (attempted burial) of the Zondo Report, to the Phala Phala story (equally discarded), and now several fresh debacles, including revelations of organised criminal syndicates at Eskom, the attempt to wiggle out of an ICC Putin arrest warrant by dumping the Rome Statutes, the equally spineless attempt to dodge commitments made under the UN IFCC climate arrangement, the embarrassing February military exercises on the anniversary of the Ukraine invasion ( greylisting for money laundering the same day), the withdrawal of an invitation to attend the Tokyo G7, the prognosis for the ruling party, if not the nation, seems rather bleak

Remembering how from afar, I watched the 1994 event, casting my first vote in Beverley Hills, Los Angeles, nogal alongside other expat South Africans, many of them exiles and refugees, the day nevertheless still brings tears of joy to my eye, but more often than not I find myself sobbing these days at the deprivation caused by the ruling party, levelling down instead of levelling up.

The South Africa to which I returned may yet be a vastly different country to the one I left, but in many significant ways, things are very much the same here — corrupt politicians, crooked political parties, well-orchestrated graft, crass state largess and siphoning of funds. The ANC from this vantage point looks no better than the previous regime and one can only hope the party will be removed from office in a spectacular way, if only to learn from its mistakes instead of operating under the false assumption of manifest destiny.

by davidrobertlewis -

Gay Malema: Good for the Goose, not just Uganda?

LITTLE MORE THAN one year ago, Julius Malema delivered a bellicose address aimed at expressing his party’s unconditional support for Putin and the United Russia Party (URP) which opposes Gay Marriage. The Russian president had just delivered a Valentine’s Day address stating same-sex marriage “will not happen” as long as he was in the Kremlin.

The result is a series of URP-sponsored Russian laws which ban “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” amongst all age groups — anyone caught committing these “offences” may be held liable for 400,000 roubles (ZAR 90 083), with much higher fines for organisations or journalists. There has been a veritable crackdown on LGBT rights in the country this year.

Juxtapose this situation with Malema’s latest pink-inspired speech before a large crowd picketing outside the Ugandan Embassy in Pretoria to protest Yoweri Museveni’s Anti-homosexuality Bill.

The leader of South Africa’s third largest political party, can be seen draped in the Rainbow Flag, synonymous with Gay Pride, professing open support for LGBT rights: “This bill is anti-human because gay rights are human rights,” enthused Malema.

“How are you going to identify that a person is gay, what scientific methods are you going to use to determine a person is lesbian? The only thing you can do is to look at a person and out of hatred decide this one is gay or lesbian and you want to kill them. That cannot be correct” he said.

Is this the self-same man, the red finagler who recently stated he would provide escort protection for Putin if the Russian President arrived in the country for a BRICS summit later this year? There is currently not a single person of colour in Putin’s cabinet, ditto LGBT.

Despite the fanfare, lofty words and woke posturing, Malema’s track record when it comes to LGBT-rights has proven quite the opposite of the puff pieces put out by his militant powdered ‘battalions’. The EFF is in a coalition with the openly homophobic Al Jama-ah Party, whose political platform opposes events such as Gay Pride, the annual Jozi Pink Pages event.

A press release put out by the party put the position on LGBT bluntly: “Their lifestyle is condemned and unacceptable.”

In the Russian Federation, (one hesitates to add Johannesburg), LGBT people face legal and social challenges not experienced by others, the country provides no anti-discrimination protections for LGBT people and does not have a designation for hate crimes based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

But as Malema explained, he intends to ‘kiss a few frogs in order to gain power”, just not that kind of frog?

Leftist political expediency, cast in broad brush strokes, could turn into an awkward ‘trill and whistle’ during the coming BRICS Summit? If the EFF want to be seen as credible voices for LGBT rights, not merely the authors of kissing points — amphibious croakers tickling electoral boxes —  then they should explain to the public their abject silence and total acquiescence when it comes to Russian rights?

Surely what is good for the Goose is good for Uganda, and is good for the rest of the globe?

The EFF pink virtue signalling certainly falls flat when it comes to the party’s other policy hallmarks — unconditional support for Hamas whose authoritarian regime has implemented penalties for homosexuality, including 10-year imprisonment terms. Male same-sex activity is still illegal and punishable by imprisonment in Kuwait, Egypt, Oman and Syria. It is also punishable by death in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

In Yemen and the Gaza Strip, the punishment might differ between death and imprisonment depending on the act committed.

by davidrobertlewis -

Islamic Fatwa Council issues Fatwa against Hamas

THE Islamic Fatwa Council (IFC) has ruled on the conduct of Hamas (Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamah al-ʾIslāmiyyah), charging the Islamist entity with violating the laws of the Holy Quran. The Fatwa was published on the IFC website on 9 March 2023 and is signed by Grand Ayatollah Shaikh Fadhil al-Budairi.

According to the document, the IFC “deems the recently publicized audio and video material containing testimonies of Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip to be both alarming and concerning. It is the responsibility of the Islamic Seminaries to take a clear and firm stance in light of the inhumane actions of Hamas.”

The IFC says it has “reviewed extensive documentation of Hamas behavior towards Palestinians in Gaza, including their recently publicized testimonies. Our findings — which are also displayed in our jurisprudential reasoning — result in our ruling that:

  1. A) Hamas bears responsibility for its own reign of corruption and terror against Palestinian civilians within Gaza;
  2. B) It is prohibited to pray for, join, support, finance, or fight on behalf of Hamas – an entity that
    adheres to the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood movement.

The IFC says it “joins The UAE Fatwa Council and the Council of Senior Scholars of Saudi Arabia in declaring the Muslim Brotherhood movement and all of its branches as terrorist organizations that defame Islam and operate in opposition to mainstream Islamic unity, theology and jurisprudence.

IFC FatwaDownload

by davidrobertlewis -

DEBUNKED: Palestinians and Jews, each form a distinct race & the conflict is thus like apartheid

IT WAS South Africa’s Hendrick Verwoerd who first resorted to the apartheid analogy in 1961 when he dismissed an Israeli vote against South African apartheid at the United Nations, throwing blame and deflecting attention by saying, “Israel is not consistent in its new anti-apartheid attitude … they took Israel away from the Arabs after the Arabs lived there for a thousand years. In that, I agree with them. Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid state. (1)

Subsequent assertions emerged during the late 1980s alongside claims of a conspiracy between Pretoria and Tel Aviv to share nuclear secrets, however it is more likely that the regime first gained its technologies from the USA and France, when the Safari 1 reactor was built in cooperation with the ‘Atoms for Peace’ program run by the US DOE in the 1950s and ’60s, only later resorting to cooperation with Israel’s Menachem Begin in order to refuel reactors and share nuclear technology as sanctions kicked in.

The analogy received renewed impetus after the release of Nelson Mandela. At the International Day of Solidarity with Palestinian People in 1997, Mandela famously said: “Our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians; without the resolution of conflicts in East Timor, the Sudan and other parts of the world”.

The quote is often redacted to exclude other conflicts, and should be seen within the context of his earlier 1990 statement: “Support for Yasser Arafat and his struggle does not mean that the ANC has ever doubted the right of Israel to exist as a state, legally. We have stood quite openly and firmly for the right of that state to exist within secure borders“.

The primary objection to the apartheid analogy which may be raised is that Nations are not races. The result is what philosopher Gilbert Ryle referred to as a ‘category error’. A semantic or ontological error in which ‘things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category’. While ethnicity plays a part, there is no scientific nor any legal basis for making such a claim.(2) (3).

Attributing race to Jews in order to make a false comparison with apartheid is racism and anti-Semitism, and meets definitions of anti-Semitism proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

A 2020 academic paper on the question Is Replacement Theology Anti-Semitic? begins by defining anti-Semitism as “normally understood as prejudice or hatred against Jewish people as a race” before concluding that since Christianity doesn’t perceive the Jews as a race, Christian theology cannot, by definition be anti-Semitic.

Advocates of the analogy often refer to the infamous 1975 UN resolution 3379 ‘equating Zionism with racism‘ which was overturned by an overwhelming majority of nations in 1991. The same assertion was voted out of the final text of the controversial 2001 Durban Conference on Racism  and the text reaffirmed at Durban II. 

A highly flawed 2017 UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) report examining the policies of Israel within the context of a UN definition of apartheid, admits the error of race, proceeds to supply “reasons for the error of comparison” and states, there is ‘no single, authoritative, global definition of any race’ at the same time that it attributes race characteristics to Jews for the purposes of analysis.

The ESCWA report was withdrawn by UN Secretary-general Guterres in 2017, while the Goldstone report was similarly retracted in part. The same category error appears in an equally flawed 2009 local HSRC report written around the time of Durban II. 

While the policies of Israel may, for many of its critics, be reprehensible and morally indefensible, the root cause is not race, (a loaded term) but rather the confluence of religion and nationality and in particular, religious schism which results in nationality on the basis of religion, a fact common to many Middle Eastern countries.