Letters you won't see in the Connecticut Post

 

 

Dear Mr. Laska:

Mike Mayko's article about the current cartoon "culture war" over some (old) Danish drawings left something to be desired.

Mayko didn't address why Muslims are rioting now since the Danish depictions of the prophet Muhammad were first published back in September 2005. In fact, the timing of these violent "protests" is coincidental with Iran's "peaceful" nuclear programs; the violent headlines they produce makes for an excellent diversion to the real threat from Islamic atomic ambitions.

Further, your decision -- and the decision of many of your peers -- not to run these cartoons also misses the mark. After a brief Internet search, I was able to find these "offensive" drawings on Michelle Malkin's web site. Although most of them were simplistic and juvenile, one cartoon -- showing a blindfolded, knife-wielding Mohammad flanked by two black-clad women showing only their wide-eyed shock -- was worth a thousand words. Unfortunately, neither my or Mayko's description does this work justice.

Not to show at least one of these newsworthy drawings effectively puts all of us under shar'ia or Islamic law. And though Islam means "submission (to God)," to put your readers under shar'ia makes literate non-Muslims subject to the dictates of  illiterate, religious rioters. 

Joseph Carl DeCaro

 

Letters Editor

There is no such thing as a Palestinian people.

Golda Meir

Another Meir quote comes to mind after reading Richard Marrash’s lengthy letter in the Sunday Connecticut Post’s Op Ed page. Contrary to Meir, Marrash said that Palestinians do exist and have “lived in Palestine since the beginning.”

But decades ago, a Dutch newspaper ran the best rebuttal to the concept of “Palestinian” ever to be made by a Palestinian!  In an interview in Trouw, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive committee member, said:

“The Palestinian people does (sic) not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian  people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism” (Trouw, Mar 31, 1977).

Muhsein went on to say that although Jordan — a sovereign state with defined borders — can’t legally claim a single town in Israel, a Palestinian can lay claim to both Jaffa and Jerusalem.

Which brings us to the Golden Hill Paugussetts; a Trumbull-based tribe that has been threatening to lay claim to private property from Orange to Bridgeport for more than a decade.

But according to the Post’s own Ken Dixon, recently the tribe “was unable to prove that it had a continual social and political community dating from the early years of the American colonies 300 years ago” (Aug, 4, 2006). Yet the Palestinian “tribe” can’t prove a similar community in the Middle East from 40 years ago!

Arab-American journalist Joseph Farah said there was no serious movement for a Palestinian homeland prior to the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.

Farah said there is no distinct Palestinian language or culture, or has there ever been a land called Palestine ruled by Palestinians (WorldNetDaily, Oct. 11, 2000).

I wonder how many of us in Fairfield County would be willing to give back our land to a people that can’t even prove they descended from a historical tribe, while insisting that the Israelis do just that for the Palestinians.

Joseph Carl DeCaro

 

 

Letters Editor:

 

Bertram Spiller’s one-sided, politically partisan view of Israel's supposed expulsion of Palestinians and “theft” of their lands (Letters from Our Readers, Sept. 7) demands that the other side of this sad story be told.

 

When Palestine was “partitioned” by the UN in 1947, many Arab squatters quickly left their homes as Israel and her Islamic neighbor nations prepared for war. The squatters assumed Israel would be annihilated  in the coming conflict, so they just got out of the way as their Arab cousins moved in for the kill; they could always move back after the Jews were "pushed into the sea."

 

But when Israel  survived despite being attacked on all sides, the Ben Gurion cabinet decided that any return of Palestinian refugees required a formal peace with its Arab neighbors. Otherwise, these repatriates would pose a threat to Israel’s security. But while the Jews demanded peace, the Arabs insisted upon immediate refugee repatriation. The result, according to Stanley Ellisen, was that the peace process was deadlocked while the Palestinians were padlocked.

 

And though most Palestinians left Israel by their own choosing, an equivalent number of Jews were deported from neighboring Arab states with little more than the clothes on their backs. This deportation was in clear violation of the Balfour Declaration (1917) that proclaimed the rights and political status of Jews living in other nations should not be prejudiced.

 

But as Jewish refugees were assimilated into Israel, Palestinian refugees were refused residency in Arab lands whose leaders, according to (the late) Israeli statesman Aba Eban, have “thrown the full responsibility for their maintenance on the shoulders of other nations” to this very day. 

 

Joseph Carl DeCaro

(Note: This letter has been edited since its intial submission.)

 

Home