Hayyan Salim Haidar 

Morons and Oxymorons 

\       02 – An episode in the continuing Nakba        

      It is HIGH TIME the World clarified what, on the one hand, says, sounds and reads as premeditated oxymorons, “deformed” historical facts and, on the other, what has become a taboo ideology-concept . 

Certified Historical Fact. 

     Palestine, as you should know, existed as a land well before last century’s criminal adventures.  The World started its recent history with WWII and the ensuing creation of the UN, its various agencies and the accompanying world and international bodies, rules, charters, laws, regulations, covenants, programmes.  Then came UNGA Resolution No. 181, the partition of Palestine, to create a state named “Israel” which, by human, ethical and historical law is illegal because it was based on giving land belonging to a people, the Palestinians, to people gathered from all over the world, for all other reasons, for no right whatsoever. 

     Furthermore, the Gaza part of Palestine was originally placed under Egyptian rule.  Then, during the early Nakba years, the Israelis annexed swathes of areas along its Eastern border, and, illegally again, while waging the 1967 June war, it occupied the Palestine part of the partition and started building colonies, called settlements in western international jargon, kibbutzims of military nature and function, all over including on Gaza Palestinian land in the ”entourage”, the very adjacent vicinity.  

     The October 7th 2023 Hamas military operation was thence carried out as an act of resistance on the historical Palestinian land, as per UN resolution 181. 

     Reminder, Article 51 of the UN charter reads: “An occupation force has no right of self-defence”. 

     Is it clear that International Law stipulates that the occupier cannot claim self-defence on the occupied land?  Is it, or shall we explain why?  Further, this law states that the occupied people have the right to self-defence, and in some instances the duty to do so and by all means.  In this repeated case, you are contradicting your law which you consider supreme. 

     So the Israeli claim, colonially supported by the western “Freedom, Democracy, Rule of Law, Human Rights” empty slogans that this war was warranted by self-defence looks like an oxymoron, (to note, Oxymoron = contradictory terms appearing in conjunction / a paradox / to describe life’s inherent conflicts and incongruities).  

   We kindly call on academics and writers of all venues to correct this mistaken concept and give us a single word that can describe this utter felony. 

      “The occupation has the right to defend its occupying (occupation)”…you keep on saying it as if it is a fact or a right.  Kindly, or else, explain under what moral code do you justify that?  Where is the legal right of an occupation to self-defence against the right of the occupied to defend himself?  In this context, we ask: where is the RIGHT to resist occupation?  The RIGHT to defend yourself from GENOCIDE and ETHNIC CLEANSING,… 

     In your law, the Palestinians should have the right to fight occupation.  In your law, the law of the jungle, there are no red lines, no limits to crime, no accountability… a total rejection of the principles of International Law.  You make up the rules as you go along, as you commit crimes. 

     Under what moral or ethical grounds, can you possibly affirm, that the oppressor has the right to self-defence; they may steal other people’s lands, pillage their homes and murder with impunity, but still enjoy the right to self-defence?  And that the oppressed must quietly accept and endure the oppression, the cruelty, the ethnic cleansing and the degradation, passively and without resistance ! 

And, should they object or resist, they are immediately classified as terrorists!! 

 

     Also, kindly REDEFINE self-defence 

     In blatant Hypocrisy, Palestinians are the only people on Earth asked to guarantee the safety of their occupier and “Israel” is the only country on the planet that calls for defence from its victims. 

     Based on these “standards” then we have the following “Historic Facts”: La Fayette fought chief Seattle in self-defence, which raises up the question: whose land was it originally, Geronimo’s or general Custer’s?  Then Truman bombed Hiro Hito and eradicated the Marshall Islands atomically in self-defence, Churchill fought Ghandi, Johnson fought Ho Chi Minh, and De Klerk fought Mandela in self-defence, and the list is very very long indeed which revives memory of the famous, now Dodo, Domino theory, for when you, again, do not make criminals accountable for their crimes, then they will soon, and inevitably, come after your children, wherever they are, for more of the same.  A certified fact as Angela Davis once said: “If they come for me in the morning, they will come for you at night”  

     Yes, an oxymoron. 

     As for the morons… we do not need further explanation !  (Moron = a person of low intelligence / foolish / stupid / idiot / imbecile). 

     The other oxymoron which needs redefining, that taboo ideology-concept, is the so-called, ever-growing, falsely called anti-semitism. 

     In short, we have a land historically known and certified as Palestine where, for thousands of years people mainly of the three celestial religions have lived as Palestinians and who, with their neighbouring fellow Arabs are mainly semites.  Then comes the now century old Zionist project, the people of who have no relation whatsoever with the semites, to invade, occupy and to “israel” ((*) a new verb meaning taking by force what belongs to others), these Ziocolonial forces, by way of faked reasoning can now, through legal actions, condemn, try and convict anyone who dares criticise the Zionist state. 

     To make it short: they have laws that condemn, prosecute, jail etc… the semites who dare criticise the (mainly) non-semites under the title of “anti-semitism”.  The latter term has “conveniently” been “developed”, in the legal framework of the freedom of thought, speech and creed regimes, to equal anti-zionism, then anti-Israel to finally land where it was first aimed at, namely anti-jew. 

     Our position can best be expressed, again, by Angela Davis words: “I am no longer accepting the things I cannot change, I am changing the things I cannot accept”. 

     Dear academics, would you kindly find a special word for yet another oxymoron. 

     Finally, a call to the International Court of Conscience (in the making… some day), please do pay attention to the morons who never stop developing the evil concepts that serve their evil designs. 

 

Hayyan Salim Haidar                                                               Lebanon, North of Palestine, December 15th. 2023.