Hey everybody, welcome back to the show.
It's anti-war radio.
Next guest is Dr.
Dean Ahmed.
He's an internationally known interdisciplinary scientist, author of signs in the heavens, a Muslim astronomers perspective on religion and science.
He is a senior lecturer at the university of Maryland, where he teaches courses on religion and progress and on religion, science, and freedom.
He also teaches a course on Islam science and development at Georgetown university for the center on Muslim Christian understanding, and is the director for the minaret of freedom Institute.
That's at minaret.org.
Welcome back to the show, Dean.
How are you doing?
Thank you very much, Scott.
It's a pleasure to be here.
I'm doing fine.
Thank you.
Well, I really appreciate you joining us today.
And of course, uh, it's a very important day, uh, in the history of the Middle East.
Uh, yesterday, I guess was the, uh, Nakba anniversary or was it the day before, uh, their massive protests across, uh, different places, I think in the West bank, Gaza, and then on the Northern border in Lebanon and Syria, Golan Heights area as well.
And, uh, today the latest headline at antiwar.com in fact, is a white house Israel right over border killings and a white house spokesman, Jay Carney praised Israel for its restraint and said that the Netanyahu government had every right to kill those people to quote, prevent unauthorized crossing at its borders, your reaction to all of this.
Well, of course, I'm very deeply disappointed in the white house to hear that.
Uh, the fact is, uh, this, uh, these demonstrations, these, I'm pointing out peaceful demonstrations are part of that peaceful part of the Arab spring that everybody's been talking about in the white house, uh, has, uh, beginning, unfortunately giving mixed reviews to, uh, liking it in some cases and not in others, I guess I shouldn't, and I'm not surprised that they dislike it when peaceful demonstrations are aimed against the Israeli occupation.
Uh, the thing that I, uh, that I, uh, am sorry that, uh, is not getting play in the mainstream press is that these demonstrators, uh, who are, uh, uh, it is true, uh, crossing a border from Lebanon or from Syria, but they are not mentioning that these demonstrators by and large are a Palestinian refugees who have had their homes taken away from them and who have at least as much.
And in, in, in many cases, more right to be in Israel than the occupying people there.
I tried to Google it and track this down.
I can't remember.
I don't, uh, first I thought it was Washington post, but it must've been something else I was reading that, uh, said in paragraph two, I guess that, well, the, uh, Palestinians, uh, this is, uh, the day where they mourn the birth of the state of Israel.
And then it's not until, uh, way further down in the article, do they say, oh, yeah, you know, there were Palestinians living there and they got ethnically cleansed at a gunpoint, many of them killed and some raped and, uh, you know, whatever, didn't even go into that.
But, uh, at the beginning, it basically makes it just sound like, you know, here, you know, the Israelis showed up for, uh, on an empty land and created a state and due to, I guess, their irrational, uh, you know, religion induced antisemitism, they mourn the day that Israel came into existence, not even acknowledging, uh, who's doing the mourning people who used to live right there over on the other side of that hill.
Well, you know, it's not surprising that Chris, that Israel has its own creation myth, uh, for the modern state of Israel.
Uh, but what is dismaying is, uh, the, uh, insistence with which they deny, uh, not only the, um, uh, the presence of the Palestinian people and, and their legitimacy, uh, and the historical fact of their, uh, of their presence, but even to attempt to deny the historical fact of their existence, um, on our website, we just posted a letter we received from a Palestinian who is now an American citizen.
He's a refugee who has, uh, who actually was there on a visit, uh, when these things took place.
And, uh, he mentioned that, uh, before the demonstrations began, uh, in Jerusalem, he ran across, uh, a petitioner, uh, the, uh, the petitioner was an Israeli, but actually he was a New Yorker with a very thick New York accent, uh, who was trying to collect the signatures on a petition, uh, against, uh, a two state solution to the, uh, uh, conflict.
Um, and, uh, in the process of engaging this man in a conversation, the man repeated the statement that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, which of course is a quote from Golda Meir.
Um, it's amazing how, uh, you know, at least, uh, when we look at the slaughter of the American Indians, at least the Americans don't claim that there was no such thing as an indigenous population.
Uh, but apparently when you have sufficient influence in the media, you can sort of get away with really a statement so outrageous, uh, that in any other context, they would be laughed, laughed at.
Right.
Well, and, you know, I guess I can see how, uh, they got away for a while with the whole, um, kind of novelization version of the founding of the Israeli state there, but you have, you know, right wing Israelis like, uh, Benny Morris, who famously wrote in the New York times that America, you better hurry up and bomb Iran before we do.
Cause if we do it, we'll use nukes.
Uh, you know, wrote that in the times this guy, and he says, oh, look, here's a little bit of honest revisionism about the, uh, expulsion of the Palestinians.
Yeah, it happened.
All right.
And check out all this stuff I found in the records about the villages that were turned upside down.
The people's lives were destroyed.
The people were killed, uh, at least a handful of rapes.
According to one interview with him, I read recently.
Uh, and you know, this guy is no, uh, you know, left wing, uh, you know, hardcore peacenik revisionist by any stretch.
And he's saying, yeah, come on.
What's wrong with admitting the truth?
Yeah, we stole a fair and square.
So what, but at least let's admit we stole it.
Yeah.
But, uh, Benny Morris is published mostly in Israel.
Uh, the, the fact is that if you go to Israel, of course, you're going to see the truth about these things, uh, because, uh, you know, they're there on the site of where it happened.
What's astonishing, uh, what's dismaying is that in the United States, it's much harder to run across the, this, uh, this historically accurate, uh, depiction of the, uh, unfolding of events.
And that's why I think it's significant that the Israeli who was petitioning, uh, was, uh, actually an American, uh, and an American Jew who had obviously immigrated relatively recently to Israel by his accent.
Uh, he comes, uh, with carrying the, the mythology that is so pervasive, uh, among Jews in America, but which, uh, people who were born and raised in Israel, uh, cannot fully swallow, even though they might like to.
Well, uh, do you have any predictions for how this, uh, current sort of miniature uprising is going to play out?
Well, I, I, I hate to make predictions, uh, because I, uh, I don't actually have a crystal ball, but, um, I can tell you what my hopes are.
Uh, apparently the organizers of this demonstration who are contrary to the Israeli claims are not Iranians and Syrians, but Palestinian peace activists are, people are hoping for a third intifada that like the first one would be a peaceful intifada and that, and therefore would fit right in to this, uh, Arab so-called Arab spring.
Uh, I think that the, uh, Palestinians have been most effective in, uh, affecting American public opinion, which is absolutely critical because the United States taxpayer willy nilly is the number one supporter of the Israeli occupation.
And so it's very important that the truth get to the American people.
And the only time that that has been successful to any significant degree was during the first intifada when, although the Israelis tried to depict the Palestinians as aggressors, the pictures that were coming over there were so much at odds with the Israeli claims that many, many Americans began to have their doubts about the wisdom of, uh, our foreign policy that supports, uh, an illegal occupation.
Yeah.
Well, and you know, I, I think if I can predict something or hope for something, it would be that that part of the narrative kind of is made a little bit more clear.
I mean, it is pretty obvious as a Jess Armando writes in his column today on antiwar.com that what's, uh, you know, happening in Palestine right now is just their version of the exact same thing that's happening in Syria and Egypt and Tunisia and some degree in Libya and, uh, in Bahrain and around the middle East, it's the Arab spring.
And that puts the Israelis right there with the Baathists in Syria and with the, uh, uh, with the various Sultans and Kings and Amirs that, uh, rule the place.
Scott, I wanted to make a comment about the, um, the accusations that the Syrians are behind or rather the white house's endorsement of these really actions.
You know, uh, the, the, the Syrians let the Palestinians not into Israel, but into the Golan Heights, which is occupied Syrian territory.
I'd like to know where they get the reasoning that a state sovereignty extends to the land that it is occupying over to neighbors.
Hey, ask the citizens of the West bank.
They'll tell you any day how it is, you know, who's sovereign over what?
Well, of course you're correct, but I'm talking about even from within the, uh, the views of, uh, American, uh, foreign policy, while America has dodged the issue of the fact that the West bank is occupied territory.
I don't think that they have ever denied that the Golan Heights is occupied territory.
Well, and who all lives on the Golan Heights and how many?
Uh, well, you know, I don't know the stats, but I do know that the basic population there are, uh, you know, are, are, are Arabs.
Although I do understand that the Israelis, uh, have been, uh, of course putting military personnel there and may even have illegal settlements there.
Uh, but I can't believe, not that it will be relevant, uh, that the majority of the population is Israeli in any case.
Well, now the dispute is over water rights, isn't it?
Well, there is a dispute over water rights, but that's not the main, the main dispute in Golan is, uh, the, uh, that the Israelis conquered it, uh, during the six day war and, uh, have refused to give it back.
Right.
But I mean, uh, well, why is it that they won't give it back other than the water?
Is there more to it?
Uh, they say it's because it's too advantageous, the position from which the, uh, Syrians could launch an attack on Israel.
I see.
Well, part of that same claim is made about the West bank as well, isn't it?
Well, the claim that the West bank could be a takeoff point for terrorist attacks.
Uh, however, uh, the, the, um, that there's another issue with the West bank and that is that some Israelis claim that it is part of Eretz Israel.
Of course, there are also some Israelis who claim that, uh, everything up to the, uh, Euphrates river is, is Eretz Israel.
So, yeah, to the border of Persia.
So I guess, uh, what do you make of the Hamas PLA deal?
In fact, could you even describe the deal?
Do you know, uh, you know, more or less in particular about, uh, what are the circumstances of the arrangement now?
And as you know, the, uh, uh, there was a fair and free election in Palestine where described by the, uh, foreign observers, the international observers as the freest, fairest election ever held in the Arab world.
Uh, and it was surprisingly won by, by Hamas.
Um, Hamas had themselves didn't expect to win outright.
They had thought that, uh, that they would just, uh, uh, be a King maker that would have to be accommodated in a new government.
Uh, however, in part because of the, uh, uh, the Bush administration at that time had, uh, tried to intervene by, uh, uh, making, uh, statements, uh, practically, uh, uh, telling the Palestinians through whom they should vote, I think that there was a reaction against that, that helped Hamas to get a better response than it's, uh, and natural support nonetheless.
Um, uh, there was a, a, uh, coalition government that was set up with Hamas, uh, of getting to appoint the prime minister.
Uh, and this was of course, totally unacceptable to Israel, although Israel should have no say in the matter, especially since, uh, Hamas while not abandoning its own platform plank, uh, calling for an end to the state of Israel, nonetheless agreed that in so far as it was acting in its position as part of the official government would honor the treaties with Israel.
Despite this fact, uh, Israel insisted that this was unacceptable and got the United States to put pressure on the, uh, Palestinian authority and on Fatah in particular, and a, uh, Fatah attempted to take over Gaza.
Hamas fought back and Gaza effectively was separated from the West bank with Hamas ruling Gaza and with, uh, Fatah replacing a substitute prime minister, somewhat dubious legality, uh, to take it away from, uh, Ismail Haniya in the Palestinian, uh, parliament.
Uh, this has been the status quo until, uh, the revolution, peaceful revolution in Egypt, uh, got rid of Mubarak, uh, and the new government, uh, of course, it's an interim transitory military government, uh, trying to cover its own tail end from an angry populist, uh, has modified somewhat the policies that were conducted, uh, under Mubarak, uh, including, uh, getting more serious about its professed role as an intermediator between, uh, Hamas and Fatah and actually finally succeeded in negotiating an agreement.
Now, while I don't know every detail of the agreement, I do, I can't give you the broad outlines.
And basically the broad outlines is that there will be a coalition interim government that will provide for the now way overdue new elections.
Uh, hopefully those will be free and fair elections again, as they were last time, uh, this time, uh, if the United States doesn't again, do something stupid, although perhaps I'm too late in saying that after this idiotic comment that they made earlier today.
Uh, but anyway, if the United States can avoid doing anything, uh, more stupid, uh, presumably the results will reflect that the broad, the distribution of attitudes amongst the Palestinian people and result in a legitimate, the coalition government, uh, that, uh, would hopefully work for the interests of the Palestinian people.
Uh, they would, of course, like any, uh, political parties, they'll, they'll try to get advantage for their own particular positions.
Uh, but clearly when you're in a situation as the Palestinians are a life and death situation, um, uh, that, that there are certain issues that have to Trump, uh, the minor disagreements that the different factions may have.
Uh, there are issues on which all the Palestinian people are united.
And those have to be the issues on which the government will move forward.
Well, I mean, what's your best case scenario at this point for a long-term, uh, you know, a permanent peace settlement with the Israelis and the Palestinians, because it seems like, uh, the peace process, which just means occupation just goes on and on and on.
Well, that's correct.
Uh, there's an interesting story that came out in today's, uh, news releases.
We have a link to on our, uh, uh, the news analysis, news and analysis section of our website and our blog, uh, is, uh, a comment by the, uh, one of the men, a critical person in the release of what are being called the Palestinian papers.
Uh, you may recall these as being sort of the Palestinian version of WikiLeaks, uh, in which, uh, this, uh, person explains why he, uh, uh, blew the whistle and released the secret documents.
And basically, uh, it was that the peace process was a sham.
Uh, it was just an excuse for Israel imposing, uh, every one of its whims on the Palestinian people under the color of, uh, uh, trying to move towards a permanent peace.
Uh, although no, no progress was made toward that end whatsoever.
Now, I think if you look at those papers, if you look at that article and, and, and if you look at the history of the negotiations of the so-called peace process, you can immediately see what the problem is.
The problem is that the United States has not been an honest broker.
The United States has, uh, used its position time after time after time in order to try to impose the Israeli position on the Palestinians.
Uh, now, so if you're asking me, can, can I be optimistic about what's going to happen next?
My answer is no, not as long as the United States, uh, uh, maintains its current, uh, position.
What can change that position?
Well, again, I have to go back to what I said earlier.
I think that a peaceful third Intifada is the only thing that's going to change that position.
There is a dedicated, we have to understand about the question of Middle East peace is that for the United States Congress, it has never been a foreign policy issue.
It has always been a domestic policy issue.
Congress believes that there is this monolithic block of voters that is going to toss them on their ear.
If they ever do anything in any way against perceived Israeli interests.
Uh, and I emphasize perceived Israeli interests because I don't think conduct continuation of the conflict is in the interest of the Israelis any more than it's in the interest of the Palestinians, those people in Congress may not even believe in the positions that they articulate and they vote for, but they continue to articulate and vote for them out of fear of this Israeli lobby.
Now, how can the Israeli lobby be countered?
Well, it can only be countered by the vast majority of the American people in whose interests, a revised and more even handed policy would benefit and what's going to get the majority of the American people to get active is for them to know the truth.
I can't tell you how often Scott, I have told people simple historical facts about this Palestinian, Israeli dispute and American citizens.
Decent people, but just not very knowledgeable about foreign policy will always say, I didn't know that.
I didn't know that.
And of course they don't know it.
Do you read about it in the New York times or the Washington post?
The only major American newspaper that has anywhere near an even handed, uh, uh, narrative about what's going on in the Middle East is the Christian science monitor.
And unfortunately it's not as widely read as these, as these others.
Uh, so, so this is what has to be done.
And as I said before, I think the only way it's going to be done is unfortunately as the Israelis overplay their hand in their murder of innocent people.
At some point, the American people is going to see that bad as Libya is horrible.
As Syria is, uh, terrible as the Iranian record has been.
The Israeli record has been even worse.
And what's worse on top of that is that unlike Syria and Iran and Libya, in the case of Israel, we're the ones, we, the American taxpayers are the ones who are paying the bill.
All right.
Well, we're over time.
I wish we had more, but I really appreciate your time on the show today as always, Dean.
Okay.
It's a pleasure to be here, Scott.
Thank you for the opportunity.
All right, everybody.
That's Dean Ahmed from the Minaret of Freedom Institute calling the faithful to freedom at minaret.org.
