A Terrible Disease of the Mind: Part II

My family and I long to return to the Gardens of Cordoba (Qurtuba). We agonise with every breath to re-inhabit the castles of Seville (Ishbeelyah). In our veins, there runs an eternal longing to walk again in the footsteps of our forefathers in Zaragoza (Saraqusta). We yearn to once again cultivate the orchards of Valladolid (Balad Al Waleed). We shall strive, by military means if necessary, to see the blessed day when we can tread along the rose-scented pathways of the splendid palace of Al Hambra (Al Hamra’a) in Granada (Ghirnata). Every stone and every particle of sand in that Iberian holy land belongs to me and to my people, exclusively. No Spaniard terrorist has the right to obstruct the will of God and deny my family the legal title to the land of our ancestors. It is God who had given us Andaluc’a (Al Andalus), and it is God who promised us that we, the exiles, shall ingather there once again.

I would indeed have to be a certified lunatic if I had meant a word of the above. Yet, the only difference between my disease of the mind and that of the millions of Jews who claimed to have “returned” to Palestine, is that in my case, at least the monuments and Arab names I am referring to are real and do actually exist today, and it is not contestable that the direct ancestors of my people did actually build that great civilisation.

On the other hand, all Zionist archaeologists have failed – after digging up every conceivable corner of Palestine for the last 62 years – to come up with a single credible Jewish teapot or tablespoon, let alone excavate an alleged Jewish temple remotely matching the grandeur of any of the visible relics of Andaluc’a.

Not only that, but they needn’t have bothered digging. Two years ago, Israeli Professor, Shlomo Sand, argued, with meticulous scholarship in his earth-shattering book, The Invention of the Jewish People, that the claim that the Jews of today are the ethnic offspring of the biblical Jews is yet another Zionist myth, because all records tell us that the current Jews are the descendants of Khazar tribes who converted to Judaism, and have no genetic link whatsoever to the Jews who lived in Palestine during Roman times. The latter, he concludes, are, most ironically, none other than the Palestinians of today who converted to Islam (or Christianity), because the Romans apparently never exiled anybody. Moreover, Sand demolishes the myth of the kingdoms of David and Solomon by proving they are pure legends that never existed. What is astonishing is that, to date, no Israeli historian has been able to debate, let alone refute, any of Sand’s devastating findings.

Yet, not only would I need to be in a straitjacket if I were serious about reclaiming Spain for the Arabs – irrespective of our real history there – but the Spanish people would have the right to laugh at the sheer absurdity of my hallucinations, if not get gravely offended by their audacity.

I cannot, for example, visit the magnificent Hall of Abencerrajes (Ibn Sarraj) in Al Hambra and then, after explaining to my children that it was Arab Muslims who constructed these wondrous architectural miracles, go on and indoctrinate them that this piece of real estate should belong to them. I cannot do that any more than an Italian tourist can visit Jerash in Jordan, and thereafter decide to build a settlement and live there because, he says, it really belongs to his great uncle, a certain Mr Julius Caesar.

This is the case simply because, in this modern world, we do not go around stealing other people’s land by attributing our crime to an ancient historical link to such land, or because we believe that we belong to the same race or religion of the people who once lived there.

But the Zionists get away with it the whole time, and have been doing so for far too long – despite the total lack of any real historical connection to the land of Palestine (not that it matters or makes it any more legitimate if they did have such a connection).

For who can, in their heart of hearts, credibly deny the blatant repugnancy of the whole underlying premise of Zionism, the very madness upon which Israel was founded? Indeed, any person who happens to support the immorality of the theft of the land of Palestine under such religious or forged historical pretexts would, in reality, be making up excuses for blatant colonisation that are far more ridiculous than my demented ranting about returning to the gardens of Cordoba.

So why do these Zionists get away with such a ludicrous monstrosity?

We all know why. The hegemony over world media exercised by Jews is crucial so that no one can ever challenge the Zionist narrative or point out the naked, unadulterated lunacy of the whole Zionist enterprise. Coupled with a world conscience shrouded in a cloud of Holocaust guilt, an event that is forbidden to even debate, you get an oppressive atmosphere that has suffocated the ability of Western civilisation to deconstruct Zionism down to its most basic insanities.

For how is it conceivable for otherwise rational populations to even entertain, let alone accept and adopt, the twisted Zionist logic about the Jews “returning” to a promised land after so many thousands of years of supposed separation? And how can these same people acquiesce to Israeli politicians openly using such religious nonsense as a justification for the contemporary and ongoing catastrophe inflicted upon the millions of guiltless Palestinian inhabitants of that land?

Take, for example, Jose Mar’a Aznar, the former Spanish prime minister, who recently gave a solemn warning on the pages of The London Times: “anger over Gaza is a distraction. We cannot forget that Israel is the West’s best ally in a turbulent region ةif Israel goes down, we all go downة”.

Well, Mr Aznar, we do not advocate for Israel to disappear or go down anywhere, because, despite the evil deeds accompanying its creation, Israel is a fact that we have to live with today. Likewise, the Israelis are fellow human beings upon whom I do not wish to impose the televised barbecuing of the eyes and flesh of their children using white phosphorus, nor shall I ever tolerate such horrendous barbarity to be inflicted upon them.

But, hey Jose, if you see nothing wrong with what Israel is, and regard its Goldstone-documented war crimes as a mere “distraction”, while ignoring that it is the source of all the “turbulence” of the region you mentioned, then you might as well give us back Malaga and Marbella. After all, in Andaluc’a, no Christian or Jew was ever persecuted or burnt at the stake, nor had his bone marrow fried by any other means.

Yet, the travesty continues unabated. Take this most recent manifestation of the mental illness enveloping the racist state of Israel (branded by Jewish US Media Inc. as “the only democracy in the Middle East”). Hillary Rubin is a US Jew from Detroit who decided to move to Israel in 2006, something millions of Palestinian refugees can only dream of. But that is not the story. Rubin happens to also be the niece of Zionist leader, Nahum Sokolow, so you would’ve supposed that she is a Jewish notable, revered in Israel for her noble lineage. Last month, she fell in love and wanted to get married to a nice Jewish boy from Herzliya. According to Ha’aretz newspaper, after filing for a wedding licence, she was refused and was told that she needed to prove the Jewishness of her maternal lineage for — listen to this — four entire generations. This is not 1933 Germany, but modern day Israel. So she got letters from four Conservative rabbis and one Chabad rabbi attesting to her Jewishness. But the Herzliya Rabbinate still wouldn’t have it. To allow her to marry her sweetheart, these men of God stipulated she comes up with the birth or death certificates of her mother, grandmother, great-grandmother and great-great-grandmother, something she, of course, failed to do. This is not an isolated incident, but the official applicable Israeli law on the books.

Oh, yes!  Adolf Hitler is turning in his grave at this news. “And they dared crucify me for the Nuremberg laws?” the Fuhrer is muttering to himself.

Well, there you have it, Ladies and Gentlemen. Didn’t I tell you that Zionism is nothing but a terrible, incurable disease of the mind? 

  • See also “A ‘terrible disease of the mind.’
  • Zaid Nabulsi is a partner in the law firm of Nabulsi & Associates. He has spent many years working for the United Nations in Geneva and has a passion for Harley Davidson bikes. Read other articles by Zaid.

    15 comments on this article so far ...

    Comments RSS feed

    1. Ismail Zayid said on August 19th, 2010 at 2:04pm #

      The ludicrous Zionist claim for the right to return to Plaestine, based on the myths that Shlomo Sand, and historic records shattered, pales in its veracity when compared with the equally illogical claim that Zaid Nabulsi and other Arabs would claim as their rights in Al Andalus [today’s Spain], based on a history of control of that land for 850 years and a distinguished civilization created there. But Zionist claims, though defying logic, carry more weight in a world the media and political structure of which bear no relation to logic.
      If the Zionist logic has any weight, I often say why don’t the Romans lay claim to England, which they ruled and controlled for over 200 years?

    2. MichaelKenny said on August 19th, 2010 at 2:12pm #

      Oh dear! Sandcastles in the air again! I’ve awlays regarded Shlomo Sand’s book as false flag propaganda for Israel. It’s so easy to disprove! A few quickies: Sand argues that the 9 million Jews who lived in Europe in 1933 could only have been the result of massive conversions. Too big a number, he argues. There are about 38 million (!) Muslims in Europe. A few ethnic Europeans in places like Bosnia and Albania, a few converts, but mainly foreign immigrants and their European children. All that in only two generations!
      Also, if German Jews, for example, are converts, why aren’t they blond-haired and blue eyed in the same proportion as the Germans? Why do Jews look, well … Jewish? Brown hair, brown eyes, big noses … Typical of the Med, but sticks out like a sore thumb further north! If you met someone who looked like Albert Einstein in the the street, would your first thought be “what a German-looking man!”
      The interesting point is that Mr Nablusi’s article could have been written without the red herring of Shlomo Sand. Lawyers don’t normally babble incoherently, so I have to wonder why he throws Sand into our eyes (so to speak!) right from the start, thereby undermining his whole article. Was Sand, perhaps, the whole point of the article?

    3. Yardan1 said on August 19th, 2010 at 4:09pm #

      Please get your facts straight. Both Christians and Muslims have been trying to make their claims at the same land since their inception. And both were founded by Jewish leaders. Jesus was a devote jew, going to synagogue on every holiday and weekend. And Mohammed learned his theories about religion from Jewish nomads. The middle east is the birth place of civilization and has been fought over many times. So technically speaking the Jewish people were there first, and then the Christians, then Muslims. So everything you said is easy to debate. And here’s the kicker, by a Jew none the less. So SHOVE IT! Please and Thank you.

    4. John Andrews said on August 19th, 2010 at 11:27pm #

      The whole ‘this-land-is-ours-because-god-gave-it-to-us’ is, and always has been, a crock of shit.

      No one, that is NO ONE… has ever proven the existence of god or gods. Therefore the whole argument is spurious – like just about everything else to do with religion.

    5. livingbridge said on August 20th, 2010 at 5:04am #

      I hope readers will go to the trouble to read Part I of this article [as linked above].

      The MichaelKenny’s, jonah’s, and others, can flail around all they want; they’ll dig their own black holes attempting to dispute what this author has written.

    6. Rehmat said on August 20th, 2010 at 6:04pm #

      According to Michael Hamilton Morgan – “Most Americans, including American Muslims, and even many Muslims from other parts of the world, know only the dimmest outlines of Muslim history, i.e., ‘they were great once, they invented arithmetic, but then they fell behind.’ Most Westerners have been taught that the greatness of the West has its intellectual roots in Greece and Rome, and that after the thousand-year-sleep of the Dark Ages, Europe miraculously reawakened to its Greco-Roman roots. In the conventional telling, this rediscovery of classical Greece — combined with the moral underpinning of the Judeo-Christian faith – led to the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, and the scientific and industrial revolutions. The intellectual contributions of Arabs, Persians, Indians, Chinese, Africans, and others in the Muslim world are relegated to mere footnotes”.

      “I hope that non-Muslims can gain greater respect and deeper understanding of their Muslim cousins than current headlines and policies would suggest and that today’s Muslims can see how Islam was once applied in a way to support creativity, invention, tolerance, and diversity of thought and behavior in both society and in individual lives.”

      “Then, maybe we can begin to understand the issues of today that will never be solved by force. Because if there is no other lesson to be drawn from Lost History, it is that force rarely if ever positively resolves issues of the spirit and the soul – whether in individuals or in civilizations.”

      http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/rediscovering-islamic-civilization/

    7. Mulga Mumblebrain said on August 21st, 2010 at 10:45am #

      Yardan!,thanks for your typically polite and thoughtful Judeofascist perspective.Pray tell me,seeing as the Jews only invented themselves and their supremacy in the Universe some time in the second millennium BCE,and that the land of Palestine has been inhabited by humans for tens of thousands of years, who really has the prior claim?And why, when the Jews only dominated some of the region for some hundreds of years and lived amongst many others (those that they had not exterminated in religiously ordained genocides)on what bases do you premise the Jews’ claim to exclusive and eternal possession of the whole region, forever? By the by, the Middle East was not ‘the birthplace of civilization’ but one of the birthplaces. You seem unaware,or do not ascribe the virtues of ‘civilization’ to the Indian, Chinese or pre-Colombian American civilizations.Why am I not surprised?

    8. teafoe2 said on August 21st, 2010 at 11:50am #

      reading M. Kenny’s offering, I’m reminded of Bart Fargo’s suggestion for another author of comic material: pretty funny alright but needs more profanity:)

      I myself have never gotten around to reading Sand, since I’ve found the same general thesis professionally articulated by several writers of unassailable reputation that I came across years ago.

      One that I came across recently, just the other day in fact, is this Joachim Martillo, who has an immense store of knowledge but is so obviously partisan in his comments about Jewish history that I worry if he vets all his facts as carefully as one has to do in this Ziofascist-dominated environment.

      ??

    9. Jacob said on September 2nd, 2010 at 10:16am #

      Shlomo Sand’s book ignores the genetic research which clearly shows that, even though there is no “Jewish DNA,” there is definite biological-genetic evidence that the Jews are one people.
      The researchers found that despite their long-term residence in different countries and isolation from one another, most Jewish populations were not significantly different from one another at the genetic level. The researchers studied seven Jewish populations: Yemenite, Ashkenazic, Near Eastern, North African, Asia Minor and the Balkans, and Ethiopian. The first six showed a strong affinity, with the Ashkenazic and Yemenite populations coming out the closest. Palestinian, Syrian and other non-Jewish Middle Eastern populations were also very close to the Jewish populations.
      Other research shows that the Jews in different countries are much closer to Jews in other countries than to their non-Jewish neighbors.
      The Ashkenazi Jews were not found to be similar to present-day Turkish speakers. This opposes the suggestion that Ashkenazi Jews descended from the Khazars, a Turkish-Asian empire that converted to Judaism in or about the 8th century CE. Dr. Neil Risch, a researcher at the Department of Genetics at Stanford University, said:
      “If you made a [genetic] map of Europe and the Middle East and you put Ashkenazi Jews on it, they would not end up in Turkey or in the middle of Europe, but in the Mediterranean.”
      If modern day Jews are descendants of converts, as Sand claims, then there would have been no similarity between the different Jewish communities.
      The results support the notion that modern Jews are descendants of the Jews who lived in the Middle East 1900 years ago. Contrary to Sand’s assertion, both history and science support the existence of the Jewish people.
      In spite losing their territorial base for more than 1900 years, and being dispersed all over, the Jews managed to preserve their historical memory and did not disappear like so many other nations of antiquity did. The Jews are indeed a people and not only a group with the same religion.
      Sand ignores the fact that the Zionist movement was founded by totally secular Jews. They were motivated by nationalism, not religion. They wanted to re-establish an independent Jewish state in Palestine, not because God promised the land to the Jews or because they felt that they are the “chosen people” but because the Jews became a people in the land, later known as Palestine. And to the great sorrow of many and against all odds, they succeeded to reach their objective and also to revive the long dead Hebrew language, both without precedent.

    10. Jonas Rand said on September 2nd, 2010 at 11:04am #

      Jacob, you are right about Sand and genetic studies of Jews, but I feel that Zionism’s propaganda is clouding your ideas about the real motivation for establishing a Jewish state in Palestine. While it is correct that Ben Gurion and the other Israeli “leaders” etc were not doing this as the “Chosen People” or anything religious, their motivations were selfishness, control and power over Palestinians. There were other possible locations for Zionist settlement, and there were ways to settle in Palestine without displacing the local population. Unfortunately, proponents of Israeli “public diplomacy” flood the internet with untrue statements about Palestine’s history, like “Israeli Jews never even did anything wrong to Palestinians”, or “they had a right to be there”. No, they had the same right as Zoroastrians or the Baha’i Faith Followers to take over Iranian cities politically and drive the Muslims out to surrounding countries. I don’t doubt that Jews share some common haplogroups, even with Palestinians. But the Palestinians are their own people, separate from European Jews, with their own culture and are directly related to the Canaanites and Philistines. European Jews, even though they share some DNA with Palestinians, have no ‘ethnic right’ or ‘religious (“God Given) right’ to control Palestinian indigenous population and invade their country. It is shameful what the Israeli government did. Also, aren’t the Mountain Jews of the Caucasus the direct descendants of Khazars?

    11. teafoe2 said on September 2nd, 2010 at 11:48am #

      Jonas, what research did you do to enable you to say to Jacob “You’re right about Sand…”? What makes you believe that the work Jacob cites is anything but more Zionist propaganda bs? Izzy has his own historians, his own archeologists, and probably his own geneticists.

    12. teafoe2 said on September 2nd, 2010 at 11:57am #

      Jacob writes: “Sand ignores the fact that the Zionist movement was founded by totally secular Jews. They were motivated by nationalism, not religion.”

      So Rabbi Ussushkin and the Lovers of Zion were “totally secular Jews”?

      The fact is that attendees at the Basel conference included both secular, “enlightenment” Jews, and religious figures. Even the most atheistic of the WZO founders made no secret of the fact that their plan depended on the religious sentiments of those their plan was tailored to appeal to.

    13. Jonas Rand said on September 2nd, 2010 at 6:07pm #

      The conclusions of this study, which was not done at an Israeli university (what makes being an Israeli academic less reliable, anyway?) make me think twice about the alleged distance of genetic relations between Palestinians and Jews. So I think he’s right about Sand being wrong. Also, there is no evidence that supports the theory of a mass migration of Khazars (who supposedly, all of a sudden, converted to Judaism) into Western Europe. However, it doesn’t mean the Palestinians are not their own independent people, separate from Jews, who have basic human rights just like anyone else. It does not contradict the theory of Philistine or Canaanite ancestry of Palestinians, which I think is also true. The Zionists = White colonialists; the Palestinians = Indians. Holocaust = Persecution of Puritans/Revolutionary War massacres by Redcoats (though it was much worse, there is still no reason to use these acts of prejudice, intolerance, discrimination, and murder to justify the same thing inflicted upon a separate group of people). An analogy to slaughters and imprisonment of Boers by British, only for them to go to South Africa and murder Zulu and other Bantu people, is not far from appropriate.

    14. Jonas Rand said on September 2nd, 2010 at 6:07pm #

      The conclusions of this study, which was not done at an Israeli university (what makes being an Israeli academic less reliable, anyway?) make me think twice about the alleged distance of genetic relations between Palestinians and Jews. So I think he’s right about Sand being wrong. Also, there is no evidence that supports the theory of a mass migration of Khazars (who supposedly, all of a sudden, converted to Judaism) into Western Europe. However, it doesn’t mean the Palestinians are not their own independent people, separate from Jews, who have basic human rights just like anyone else. It does not contradict the theory of Philistine or Canaanite ancestry of Palestinians, which I think is also true. The Zionists = White colonialists; the Palestinians = Indians. Holocaust = Persecution of Puritans/Revolutionary War massacres by Redcoats (though it was much worse, there is still no reason to use these acts of prejudice, intolerance, discrimination, and murder to justify the same thing inflicted upon a separate group of people). An analogy to slaughters and imprisonment of Boers by British, only for them to go to South Africa and murder Zulu and other Bantu people, is also not far from appropriate.

    15. Jonas Rand said on September 2nd, 2010 at 6:07pm #

      Double post, sorry. Remove the first one, please.