Major questions and answers On the Question of Palestine By: Mohamed Kamel
Major questions and answers On
the Question of Palestine
By: Mohamed Kamel
Oct 7, 2000:
Those are some major questions
and proposed answers to be modified and add on to them;
1. What do you need?
We are
looking for justice to achieve peace, the Zionists occupied our land since 1947
and all the world watch that and keep condemning the occupation and issued
resolution after another without and real action, so far more then 47
resolution condemning the Zionists aggression and violation to the basic human
rights, so simply we need peace but peace build on justice, not peace build on
compromising from Arab side and Zionists every time gain a few lands and
destroy peoples life. Palestinian has no home no hope no real life no lands
since 1947.
2. Why now?
Or our
life we are searching for peace, we are looking for justice to achieve peace,
our people accept to go into negotiations but they rich a point that there is
no hope and when there is no hope there will be no reason that people fear for
their life and there is no reason to accept that others leave in peace, far
more then 47 resolution condemning the Zionists aggression and violation to the
basic human rights, so simply we need peace but peace build on justice, not
peace build on compromising from Arab side and Zionists every time gain a few
lands and destroy peoples life. Palestinian has no home no hope no real life no
lands since 1947.
3. Is the action of Sharon
justifies the reaction from the Palestinian?
It is
not fare to try to but those in the same level, he is killer, the Zionist
government knew that any action by this killer will have a strong reactions,
specially entering one of our most secure places. It is not the start the start
return more 52 years back, more then 47 resolution from the UN condemning the
Zionists aggression and violation to the basic human rights, so simply we need
peace but peace build on justice, not peace build on compromising from Arab
side and Zionists every time gain a few lands and destroy peoples life.
Palestinian has no home no hope no real life no lands since 1947.
4. But why you start all this
violence for a visit?
The
violence did not start with this visit, the violence started since 1947 when
the Zionism took our land and start they long term plan of genocide against our
people, killing them in mass destroying villages, kidnapping, rubbing… and we
end with people with no land no rights. Under the international laws the people
under occupation have the right of defending them self with all the
measures. During the second world war
all the world support the right of France to be liberated, why not Palestine,
Canada sent its trop and proud to be part of this action, where is Canada know?
5. Why Mr. Arafat is not
cooperating with Mr. Barak’s government to achieve peace?
1st
of all I am not speaking for Mr. Arafat, but let me tell you some thing very
important, the Palestine Authority is the last chance for a peace with the
Zionists, and even thought these last aggression Mr. Arafat met with Mrs.
Olnright and Mr. Barak but Mr. Barak is the one who refuse to sign accepting
international committee to investigate his aggression against the innocent
people. Is the stones are too strong that it makes the biggest army in the
Middle East retaliate with life animations, even with missiles, helicopters and
tanks.
6. What compromise your people
would accept?
What compromise the world
accepted when the Nazis occupied France? What compromise you could accept if
some people occupied your land and send you and your family out for no land no
identity and no future? You know what you are asking us people, if I take your
house by force, would you sue me for the basement, the living room or most
likely the house! It is an issue of basic human rights and principals, in 1917
the Jews were promised a land where there were people “Palestine”, in 1947 the
Jews created a stat over this land.
Open Letter to Camp David
Partners
Mohamed Kamel’
Aug, 20, 2000
It is very nice to dream of
peace and it is very nice to have world peace, but what is the difference
between having and dreaming of peace.
To dream of peace: it is very
easy to start negotiating and put all the people on alert for expected
announcement every day. It is very easy to go in a political game in which we
through the ball to each party’s field. All this is good for dreams; all of
this is good for heightening the ambitions, hops and dreams of the poor people
who do not have homes in which to sleep, eat or have the simplest of dreams.
All of this is good for giving hope to those who lack, and giving dreams to
those who haven’t.
All these are not practically
effort for peace, all these are games, created to mislead those concerned,
without having real solutions at hand.
As interesting as the hope for
peace is, the political game of negotiations is very dreadful, as it can lead
to more violence upon failure. Dreaming is very good as it builds ambitions and
hops for a better future, but those who have lost their dreams have no more
ambition and more hope and thus becoming desperate, taking maters in their own
hands, violence seems like the only solution. Since it is in fact the most
effective way of getting people to listen and may be care. Care rather then
watch and blame the victims.
We are hearing over and over
about compromises. But compromise is not the real issue. It is a matter of
rights, if I take your house by force, would you sue me for the basement, the
living room or most likely the house! It is an issue of basic human rights and
principals, in 1917 the Jews were promised a land where there were people
“Palestine”, in 1947 the Jews created a stat over this land.
The UN accepted that and decided
to create two states to accommodate the Arab and the Jews, each in a state,
what a compromise! But it remains a UN decision, the UN body which is the world
countries united in a decision, in 1948 Arab and Jews went in war and the Jews
occupied most of the of the UN declared Palestinian state, and then they
started to blame the Arabs of not accepting the two states, “ So you do not
accept, if you have no power you get nothing”. And still now the dream of the
great Israel exist “from the Nile River to the Euphrates
River”
Neither Arabs nor Jews were happy with the wars that took
place until 1967 in which the new Jewish state took over parts from three
neighbouring countries (Egypt, Jordan, Syria) in addition to what remained of
the UN declared Palestinian state.
Palestinians remained on the
world’s eyes as refugees who have the right to return and be compensated, and
the UN’s resolutions in 1947, 1948, and up to date stated the same: “no rights
could be build on the reality of occupation and no change to the occupied land
would constitute rights”. Those are not only UN resolutions but also
international laws principles.
So it is a matter of principal,
is the world going to stick to principals will it accept that a country have
the power to gain control over another by force. It is not a matter of
concessions to have peace; it is a matter of achieving real justice, which will
be accepted for its farness.
What you are discussing now is not the main issue: how
many refugees have the right to return? Jerusalem belongs to whom…etc? The real
issue is so simple and so clear: what have the UN resolutions called for, those
resolutions should be implemented, and that is the real only possibility of
achieving peace, if it is in fact real peace which we are looking for; other
wise it will remain some people’s game of giving hope of peace and we will
return to a no war no peace situation in which each party will try to bring
justice by his means.
Camp David Partners:
I would like to thank you in
behalf of humanity for your effort for peace, but please be honest you will be
judged not only today or tomorrow but also the 100 years to come.
Mohamed sherif kamel
Freelance writer, Montréal, Canada
posted by Mohamed S Kamel @ 10:10 PM
0 Comments
