Apologies for the delay in responding as all AN listmembers are
restricted to two messages daily, except in emergencies..

So, on the surface of it, it seems like there are two ways of handling
the Hollowcause: 1) to insist that it bears no relevance to the
Arab-Zionist conflict, even if the Zionists use it as an excuse, and
2)
to debunk it as the bunch of myths it is.

The proponents of the first approach believe that it is smart
politically to admit to the Hollowcause, to avoid antagonizing the
"left" in the west, and to avoid any association with Nazis.

But what's wrong with this picture is that once you accept the
received
version of the Hollowcause, then you would set yourself up for a
comparison that would diminsh your cause so much, your cause would
turn
into something similar to calls to 'save the whale' in a Palestinian
refugee camp currently under heavy Zionist bombardment!!

You will say: but why should there be a comparison to begin with?!

Because the Hollowcause was INVENTED to be used as a yardstick that
diminshes all else. That is its raison d'etre. The Zionists did not
go through the trouble of making up the myths of the Hollowcause so
you'd have the option of saying it is irrelevant to the discussion at
hand. INDEED, THE HOLLOWCAUSE MYTHS ARE SO UNPARALLELED AND SO
GRUESOME, HAD THEY BEEN TRUE, THEY WOULD WIN WORLD SYMPATHY WITH NO
QUESTIONS ASKED NOT ONLY IF THE JEW TOOK PALESTINE, BUT ALSO IF HE
BLEW
UP SEVERAL NUCLEAR BOMBS ON THE HEADS OF ARABS AS WELL. This is not
to
mention, of course, justifying Jewish/Zionist power and whole bunch of
other fringe benefits.

So, I suggest we stop running, cause there is no where to hide. THE
HOLLOWCAUSE MUST BE DECIMATED RUTHLESSLY. There is no other way about
it.

Just to illuminate my point with an example, allow me to site what Uri
Aveniri said: the Palestinians are the victims of the victims of the
"Holocaust". They are like the victims of a man who jumped from an
apartment 'on fire' on top of the head of another man. That is why
the
victim of the victim didn't get as much sympathy as he expected to!

Surely, you will say Uri Aveniri is on Arafat's payroll and so he is
not very credible. But think about this: even while getting paid,
that's the best Uri could come up with, because he is a Jew living in
Palestine, that is, a Zionist by definition.

Okay, feel free to ignore my last remark. Allow me to present a
different example though: the New Historians of "israel".

These bastards have written wads of paper on Zionist atrocities
against
Palestinians in 1948 and beyond. Being light-headed as many of us
are,
we rose to salute New Historians (who are different from Revisionist
Historians by the way who debunk the Hollowcause myths). But let's
take two of the most well-known "Israeli" New Historians: Benny Morris
and Illan Pappe.

The first, for all his well-documented writings on Zionist atrocities
against Palestinians in 1948 claimed recently in an interview in
Haartz
on January 9th, 2004, that what he wrote about Zionist atrocities does
NOT change the fact that, in his opinion, these atrocities HAD TO
HAPPEN BECAUSE THE ZIONISTS HAD NO OTHER CHOICE, just like the white
settlers in America HAD NO OTHER CHOICE BUT TO ERADICATE THE NATIVES!!

Imagine that crap! I loved it though, because it helps many
Palestinians wake up when they read it.

Another New Historian, Illan Pappe, however, is much more sinister.
He
does not agree necessarily with the open Zionism of Benny Morris (whom
some Palestinians thought he was documenting their suffering for a
noble cause : ) : ) : ) : )

But Illan Pappe uses a more roundabout Zionism based on the MYTHS OF
THE HOLLOWCAUSE.

For example, read this from an interview he gave on Sept. 11, 2002, in
England. When asked by reporter Greg Dropkin how come "israel" was
able to hide from the eyes of the world all the atrocities it
committed
against Palestinians in 1948 Pappe retorted:

"Because of the Holocaust it was easier for Israel to do it than for
any other nation, I think. And it succeeded. "

But make no mistake about it! Pappe might be the cream of the crop,
but don't even think about undermining the "Holocaust" by comparing it
to the Nakba of Palestinians in moral or physical terms. According to
that crypto-Zionist: "one doesn't, shouldn't and cannot equate a
genocide with ethnic cleansing. They are both terrible things but
definitely a genocide is a far worse human crime than ethnic
cleansing.
And one should not equate the Holocaust with the Nakbah. "

Don't you love this? I do, because it shows exactly what the alleged
Hollowcause is supposed to do, particularly to those pro-Palestinians
so eager to avert it.

But does Illan Pappe stop here?

Enjoy this from someone who doesn't allow to compare the moral and
physical aspects of the "Holocaust" and the Nakba of 1948. He is
saying, our suffering was greater AND YOU AS PALESTINIANS SHOULD
RECOGNIZE THAT. Dig this: "But there is a dialectical connection
between the Holocaust and the Nakbah. On two levels.
One is the fact that there is a chain of victimisation here. The
Palestinians are the victims of the victims of the Holocaust. And you
would have expected the victims of the Holocaust not to perpetrate any
crimes against humanity. And definitely when you start looking at
exactly what had been done to the Palestinians, what is being done to
the Palestinians nowadays you can see, not from the genocide phase of
the Holocaust, I think there is no resemblance there, but definitely
from the pre-extermination phase there are many, many things which
resemble. Because ethnic cleansing also took place in Nazi Germany,
and
discrimination also took place before the horrible phase of
extermination.
So that's on one level. The second level is no less important, that
there is what I call the "Nakbah Denial", "Catastrophe Denial". I
think
there is a similar "Holocaust Denial" on the Palestinian side, and I
am
a great believer that in order to further the chances of
reconciliation, you have to have a kind of link, an association
between
the ability of the Israelis to stop denying the Nakbah, and the
Palestinians accepting that the Holocaust plays a role in the life of
Jews in Israel, and the life of Jews everywhere. I'm not inventing the
wheel, this was first mentioned by Edward Said in his book "The
Dispossession of the Palestinians", but I think it's a good idea. That
we are all there victims also of the Holocaust, not only of what we
are
doing to each other. "

Now, I hope at least some of you see why I have been so critical of
Edward Said in spreading Hollowcause consciousness amongst
Palestinians. But if you don't, fine! Let's at least agree that both
types, those who recognize the Hollowcause like Mr. Ed. Said, and
those
who say it's a bunch of crap, say that you cannot remove it from the
equation of the Arab-Zionist conflict. That's all I am saying. The
difference is that in the case of Said, accepting the received version
of the Hollowcause has led him logically to espouse calls for
co-existence, against human bombs, anti-Islamism and anti-Arab
nationalism. Whereas recognizing the Hollowcause as THE INTERNATIONAL
IDEOLOGY OF ZIONIST POWER TODAY, forces you to butt heads with it
directly, with collateral damage amonst our alleged supporters amongst
western 'leftists' (who also happen to embrace the Hollowcause believe
it or not!) remaining only a minor concern.

If the Hollowcause is a major problem for our struggle, then we should
do a better job of explaining why to our potential supporters in the
west, which is what the staff of the Free Arab Voice tried to do in
three separate issues of FAV that you can find on the following links:

Before you click on those links, however, allow me to present yet
another example to illustrate what the Hollowcause is to public
opinion
in the west. As an Arab, do you know how unmoved you would be if
someone presented you with photos of Jewish 'victims' of a Palestinian
human bomb? When you are forced to hide your enjoyment of these
sights
because you have to explain it to someone from the West, your
immediate
reaction is typically: well, that is like less than one percent of
atrocities visited upon us. We are far behind on paying back all that
we owe them still. Okay! That is exactly, and I mean exactly, the
psychological impact of the Hollowcause on western audiences when they
see Palestinian suffering. That REAL Palestinian suffering is DWARFED
by the FAKE suffering of the Hollowcause. You know what I mean.

Now go say it's irrelevant as much as you want.

The media machine and the entertainment industry have not been playing
marbles on the side walk for the last few decades. The Hollowcause is
the LICENSE TO KILL of the Jew in Palestine and the Arab region. But
the Hollowcause is also a Jewish license to rise above international
law and keep Jewish/Zionist power above any inquiry under the threat
of
being branded with 'anti-semitism'.

So, let's stop running from this ideological monster, shall we?

On Trotsky, I only brought him as an example of a Jew who was not able
to rid himself of Jewish, and hence, of Zionist influnces completely.
His real name is Lev Bronstein, and he is a far cry from others, like
Stalin, who may have had a Jewish grandfather or grandmother somewhere
sometime. Lev Bronstein (Trotsky) was Jewish by culture as well.
Marx's father, for example, had converted to Christianity and his
mother was not Jewish. Mainly, he didn't grow up in a Jewish
environment. Neither did he associate with with Jews.

Anyway, below you shall find excerpts of Lev Bronstein's (Trotsky's)
infamous interview with Forwartz, the Yiddish Magazine that came out
of
New York, in 1937.

In my personal opinion, it represents, at least, a clean break from
his
former clearly anti-Zionist positions at the turn of the century.

Specifically, in the interview below, I found that he has reneged on
Bolshevik positions on the Jewish question in at least three aspects:

1) he started recognizing Jews as a nation where Marx and Lenin
considered that Jewish nationhood was imaginary and reactionary.

2) he accepted the principle of a Jewish state, where Lenin and Marx
considered the solution to the Jewish question to be assimilation, not
territorialism. In fact, that was the bone of contention between
Lenin
and the BUND party: assimilation for Jews or territorialism

3) he accepted the principle of Jewish immigration to Palestine,
although he postulated that such immigration and statehood should take
place under a socialist, not a British imperialist banner.

Of course, I realize that Trotsky had had a record on the Jewish
question that contradicts the positions below. In fact, perhaps we,
as
Arabs, were lucky that uncle Stalin took him before Bronstein had had
the opportunity to formulate an even more sinister elaboration of
Zionism than anything the "leftists" we know today can ever come up
with.

With all respect due to Trotskytes's personal points of view...

There is just nothing personal about supporting Zionism.

That, as I said earlier in reference to the Hollowcause, must be
confronted head-on, wherever we may find it.

Later
Ibrahim Alloush

In confirmation and in the year 1937 Bronstein (Trotsky) was
interviewed to the effect that;

One must therefore reckon with the fact that the Jewish nation will
maintain itself for an entire epoch to come. Now, the nation cannot
normally exist without a common territory. Zionism springs from this
very idea. But the facts of every passing day demonstrate to us that
Zionism is incapable of resolving the Jewish question. The conflict
between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine acquires a more and more
tragic
and more and more menacing character. I do not at all believe that the
Jewish question can be resolved within the framework of rotting
capitalism and under the control of British imperialism.

And how, you ask me, can socialism solve this question? On this point
I
can but offer hypotheses. Once socialism has become master of our
planet or al least of its most important sections, it will have
unimaginable resources in all domains. Human history has witnessed the
epoch of great migrations on the basis of barbarism. Socialism will
open the possibility of great migrations on the basis of thye most
developed techique and culture. It goes without saying that what is
here involved is not compulsory displacement, that is, the creation of
new ghettos for certain nationalities, displacements freely consented
to, or rather demanded by certain nationalities or parts of
nationalities. The dispersed Jews who would want to be reassembled in
the same community will find sufficiently extensive and rich spot
under
the sun. The same possibility will be opened for the Arabs, as for all
other scattered nations. National topography will become a part of the
planned economy. This is the grand historical perspective that I
envisage. To work for international socialism means to work for the
solution of the Jewish question. 108

The very same methods of solving the Jewish quesiton whihc under
decaying capitalism have a utopian and reactionary character
(Zionism),
will, under the regime of a socialist federation, take on a real and
salutary meaning. 109

The need and desire for Jewish territory that is self-determinant --
freed from expulsions and pogroms -- has been led into the fortified
ghetto being called Eretz Yisroel but which actually operates as the
State of Israel under the auspices of the United States of America.

On How to Handle the Hollowcause, Trotsky!