Democratic Palestine : 20 (ص 36)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 20 (ص 36)
- المحتوى
-
Of course, this is not the subject. The
subject is that Laith’s family should
know what happened to Fadhil and not
go to Abdel Moula. The subject is that
the families of all the Laiths, wherever
they are posted, should not go to the
Moulas in Cairo, Rabat, Amman or
Riyadh.
In 1968, Um Saad asked Ghassan,
«If I went to Um Laith and reminded
her of the story of Fadhil and Abdel
Moula, would it do any good?»
Ghassan answered with a question:
«Maybe, but why do you speak as if
you are sure that Laith’s family is
thinking of writing to Abdel Moula?»
Um Saad answered, «I’m not sure of
anything, but I must do something.»
At this point, I imagined Ghassan
rewriting the story of Um Saad in 1986,
and asking her if she is sure that Laith’s
family is thinking of writing Abdel
Moula. I also imagined Um Saad
speaking of the daily shuttles between
Cairo, Amman, Rabat and Baghdad. I
imagined her speaking to Ghassan
about the Cairo declaration, the
Amman accord, about the plan for
‘improving the quality of lite’ in the
West Bank and Gaza Strip, about
Rashad Shawwa and Mohammed
Milhem, and about the question of
Protests
on Balfour Day
November 2nd is infamous as the
date of the letter sent in 1917, by British
Foreign Secretary Balfour to the Zio-
nist leader, Lord Rothschild, promising
support for a national homeland for the
Jews in Palestine. This letter, known as
the Balfour Declaration, marked the
beginning of official imperialist spon-
sorship of the Zionist program to
colonize and usurp Palestine. Each
year, this day is marked by the Palesti-
nian people under occupation, with
protests and acts of resistance against
the Israeli occupiers.
This year the Zionists clenched their
iron fist particularly hard on November
2nd. A virtual state of siege prevailed
around many of the towns and camps
of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Nonetheless there were mass demons-
trations denouncing the occupation and
imperialism. The people threw stones at
Zionist vehicles, burned tires and
blockaded roads. The Zionist forces
opened fire and used teargas to disperse
demonstrators in Jerusalem. Militant
demonstrations in nearby Qalandia
camp and in Al Bireh were brutally
suppressed. In Al Amari camp, near
Ramallah, demonstrators stoned an
Egged bus, injuring one Zionist. The
forces imposed a siege on the camp. Bir
Zeit and Najah universities were also
besieged, following demonstrations.
accepting resolution 242 and auto-
nomy.
Um Saad suggests a solution to the
dilemma of Fadhil and Laith: «If on
that day, Fadhil had gotten up and shot
Abdel Moula, would not the problem
have ended?»
Ghassan answers: «If he had done
so, the pecple would have killed him.»
Ghassan explains why this would have
happened, relying on the cleverness of
Um Saad in knowing that, at a parti-
cular moment, it can be difficult for
revolutionaries to shoot collaborators
who are dressed in patriotic garb, or
whom the people, the revolutionaries
included, have made into a symbol.
However, the real solution does not
escape the clever Um Saad. She res-
SOLIDARITY
CAMPAIGN
WITH THE
PALESTINIAN
PEOPLE
ere ee ee
ponds to Ghassan, saying, «It’s true
that people would have killed him that
day... it would have been better for him
had he remained in the mountains and
not attended that party» - exactly as
happened to some of Laith’s family
who attended the 1982 ‘party’ in Fez.
Ghassan answers her: «If he had
remained in the mountains, Um Saad,
Abdel Moula would never have been
able to hold the party.»
The excuse of Fadhil of 1936 was, in
Um Saad’s eyes, that «nobody was
there to warn poor Fadhil.» What is the
excuse Of Fadhil of 1986, when many
were there to warn him? After fifty
years, the message has still not gotten
through. Is anybody listening? Ps
. Yin u
NOVEMBER 29 - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 20
- تاريخ
- نوفمبر ١٩٨٦
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed