by Hank Roth
The entire Middle East has been divided and invented by the French and the British. Border were decided by them and not by the indigenous people who lived there. There was no Syria, no Algeria, no Tunisia. There was no Palestine. There was no Iraq. And the exotic names for these places were given to the world by conquerers, not the local people who lived there. Middle Eastern historian, and Princeton University professor Bernard Lewis, who is fluent in Arabic, Hebrew, Turkish and several other Middle Eastern languages, tells us there is no words for many places in the Middle East, like Algeria and Tunisia because the Arab sense of place was different than our identification of a place with a nation and places like Libya, Palestine, Syria, etc., are actually names from the Roman Empire to identify Roman geography. There is also no word in Arabic for Arabia. These words were invented by Europeans. Palestine (Syria Palestina) was a word invented by the Romans.
He says about the Arabic language, it is “a remarkably rich and subtle language. But they just didn’t think that way in terms of ethnic, territorial identity. You have to say the land of the Arabs or something like that.” [Tony Snow, “Interview with Bernard Lewis” (04-18-2003) – Special Report with Brit Hume (Fox News Network)]
SHORT HISTORY OF ISLAMIC CONQUEST
“…….from the seventh century when Islam appeared the Prophet Mohammed lived and taught and died and the Koran was promulgated…From then until the 17th century they were always advancing somewhere…Now, it is true that they suffered losses here and there. They lost, they failed, finally, in their 800-year-long attempt to conquer Spain and use it as a base for further advance in Western Europe. They failed to hold on to Russia, which was rule by the Islamist (ph) Tartars there for a while. But where it mattered, as they saw it, in the center, they were advancing…..And remember, as late as the 17th century, there were still Turkish pashas governing Budapest and Belgrade, the Turkish armies besieging Vienna and Barbary corsairs from North Africa raiding the coasts of England and Ireland, and even as far as Madera and Iceland on occasion. So, they seemed to be doing very well…” [Lewis]
“Then came the second Turkish siege of Vienna. The first one in the 16th century ended with what in sporting language you might call a draw or in chess language, a stalemate. They were bogged down for a century and a half. Then 1683, comes the second Turkish siege of Vienna, which is an unmitigated disaster that resulted in a total rout of the besieging Turkish forces and undignified retreat through the Balkans…..And a Turkish historian at the time, whose name was Celistar Patar (ph); he says in his contemporary chronicle of these events, he says this is the greatest catastrophe that we have suffered since the foundation of the Ottoman State. And one must admire the candor of the 17th century historian for which I have been able to find no parallel in 20th century historians.” [Lewis]
The second _greatest catastrophe” for Muslims was to see the rise and revival of a Jewish state in the middle of an almost entirely Muslim region. It must be remembered that to the Arabs there were no separate places which were as important as the entire Arab nation and it seems to them that creating a state of Jews in the middle of an Arab nation was a terrible calamity and it becomes their greatest catastrophe. It has led to a revival of radical Islam also because the imans blame Muslims for not being faithful. (They believe) Why else would Allah allow this catastrophe?
(See Bernard Lewis’ latest books: “What Went Wrong,” and more recently, “The Crisis of Islam’s Holy War and Unholy Terror.”)
If the British had their way there would not have been an Israel. While charged with the Mandate there was an influential view in Britain that their alliances should have been with the more powerful Arabs.
The British did all they could to have Israel fail. They also prevented Jewish immigration when it was most needed. They are directly responsible for the death of many Jews who might have been saved if not for British colonial and military interests to the contrary.
“The British government was privy to the Arab plans for invasion (in
1948), and on every diplomatic front, and especially in the United Nations and in the United States, it pursued a vigorous campaign of pressure and obstruction to hinder and prevent help to the embattled Zionists and to achieve the abandonment of the plan to set up a Jewish state. When the state was declared nevertheless, the British government exerted every effort to bring about its defeat by the invading Arab armies. it was not by chance tha one of the last operations in the war between Israel and the Arab states in January 1949 was the shooting down on the Sinai front of five British RAF planes that had flown across the battlelines into Israeli-held territory. This was the culmination of a policy developed and pursued by the British throughout their administration of the Mandate–surely not the least of the great betrayals of the weak by the strong in the twentieth century. The policy of the Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin, who was severely criticized, was no more than the logical, if extreme, evolution of the policies of Anthony Eden, who inspired the creation of the Arab LEague in 1945; of Malcolm MacDonald, the Colonial Secretary who presided over the declaration of death to Zionism int he White Paper of 1939, and of their predecessors who shaped the `Arab Revolt’ of 1936, who made possible the `disturbances’ of 1929, and who were responsible for thepogrom in Jerusalem in 1920.” [Samuel Katz, “Battle-Ground..” 1973/1985 – page 45]
PEOPLE BEFORE PROFITS!