| Submit your comments on this article |
| Middle East |
| More Arabic moonbattery |
| 2003-10-02 |
| EFL. Hat tip LGF Now that British rule has been brought to an end, the opponents of Ahmadiyyat have invented a new charge that the Ahmadis are the agents of Israel. In this context it is worthy of note that the first voice raised against the establishment of Israel was the voice of the Ahmadiyya Community, yet its opponents feel no compunction in charging it with being the agents of Israel. When the question of Palestine was raised in the United Nations, Chaudhry Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, a devoted Ahmadi, was enabled by divine grace to deliver a powerful speech on 9 October 1947 in the Committee of the United Nations Assembly that was dealing with the problem, in which he put forward the case of the Palestine Arabs with great ability. The Nawai Waqt of October 12 1947 commented: The special correspondence of Reuter has reported that after the speech of Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, the Pakistani delegate, the Committee of the General Assembly of the United Nations dealing with the question has been confronted with an awkward situation. Till the delegation of the United States declares its position with reference to the problem, other delegations are not prepared to speak. The United States delegate is not ready to speak till President Truman and the Secretary of State, Mr. George Marshall, and the U.S. delegation itself agree upon a united stand. The Chairman of the Committee, Dr. Herbert Evatt, of Australia, expressed his uneasiness at the debate appearing to have arrived prematurely at its end. The U.S. delegate remained sitting silent as if his lips had been sealed. Such a situation is unprecedented in the United Nations. The Pakistani delegate expressed the view of other delegations when in his annoyance he suggested that as leading delegates were reluctant to speak the general debate on the question of Palestine might be closed. The same organ wrote: The speech delivered by Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, leader of the Pakistan delegation, in the Committee of the UN General Assembly on the question of Palestine was most outstanding in every respect. He spoke for one hundred and fifteen minutes. When he finished his speech an Arab representative said that this was the best speech on the case of the Arabs and that he had not so far heard any such outstanding statement of their case. Muhammad Zafrulla Khan devoted the greater part of his speech to arguing against the partition of Palestine. During the course of his speech the faces of Arab representatives shone with pleasure. At the end of the speech the delegates of Arab countnes shook him by the hand and felicitated him on his glorious speech. A British delegate sent a message to Zafrulla Khan that his speech was outstanding and that he would request to be furnished with a copy of it so that he might study it with great care. This historic speech of Ch. Muhammad Zafrulla Khan presented the true aspects of the problem of Palestine before the United Nations and the delegations of several member countries made up their minds in pursuance of it to vote against the partition of Palestine, but thereafter some of them changed their minds under pressure from the great powers. On 9 December 1947, Ch. Muhammad Zafrulla Khan delivered an address on the subject of Palestine in the Government College Lahore which was reported in the Nawai Waqt of 11 December in the following terms: Ch. Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, leader of the Pakistan delegation to the Assembly of the United Nations, spoke at length on all aspects of the problem of Palestine. He condemned the resolution of the UN General Assembly recommending the partition of Palestine as entirely unjust. Speaking at the Government College Lahore, he expressed great regret that the United States Government procured the recommendation of the United Nations in support of the partition of Palestine by exercising undue pressure on some of the small Powers, members of the United Nations. He said that Palestine had been made a pawn in the election politics of the United States. He pointed out that in the proposed Jewish State to be set up in Palestine, not only will a large Arab minority be subjected to Jewish domination but the economy of the country will pass under international control which would be an illegal development. Then his lips fell off He explained that on 26 November it was certain that the resolution could not be carried and its supporters were convinced that it would be defeated) but that at the last moment the voting was unnecessarily postponed to 28 November so that pressure could be exercised on some of the member states that they should give up their opposition to the resolution and vote in support of it. He mentioned that on 28 November the representative of Haiti met him after the voting and with tears literally running down his cheeks made his apology that he had not been left free to vote in accordance with his original instructions. Several other delegates confessed that they had been compelled to vote in support of the resolution under great pressure. Sigh
Another Middle Eastern beauzeau with an autoimmune reaction to brain tissue. |
| Posted by:Katz |
| #4 Interesting how holy Jerusalem was to the Arabs prior to Jews being repatriated there. It's more of a homeland to the Jews than any Bedouins or "Palestinians". For Paleo homeland, look east to Jordan |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-10-2 10:38:20 PM |
| #3 Given the past 50+ years of warfare in the region one does tend to think that refounding Israel in its historical location was probably a bad idea from the start... The Jewish state should probably have been created using a sizeable chunk of Germany instead -- which was after all the party responsible for WW2, not the Arabs. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2003-10-2 9:56:23 PM |
| #2 ummm...Pakistanis aren't Arabs.. |
| Posted by: Paul Moloney 2003-10-2 8:14:53 PM |
| #1 Actually, this is a defence of Ahmadi Muslims against charges of apostasy. This sect is rather rational, and is the target of some bigotry by some radical groups. This article just establishes that they too were against Israel from the beginning (in a fairly measured way it seems to me) and therefore in the mainstream of Muslim opinion at the time. |
| Posted by: buwaya 2003-10-2 11:59:01 AM |