Today, I came across the weirdest article ever at the Atlanta Black Star, entitled, In Jerusalem, Afro-Palestinians Are the Hardest Hit in the Israeli Occupation. What, pray tell is an Afro-Palestinian? According to the article, an Afro-Palestinian is a Palestinian of “African descent.”
Which begs the question: if someone is from Africa, how does that make that person a Palestinian? Will we soon have Sino-Palestinians and Franco-Palestinians? Can anyone be a Palestinian (except Jews, of course, their British Mandate identity cards notwithstanding)?
The article speaks of these “Afro-Palestinians” as being more oppressed than regular, garden variety Palestinian-Palestinians (still with me?) and says they (all 350 of them) live next to Al Aqsa Mosque in a neighborhood that is “wedged between two Israeli police checkpoints.” This should be translated as, “They live near the Western Wall complex and have to go through security when they want to pass through the area, just like the Jews, because some (read “lots of”) Palestinian-Palestinians like to carry bombs and knives on their persons for the purpose of killing Jews.”
Because of this little Palestinian-Palestinian habit of sneaking weapons into public spaces to kill Jews, everyone has to be checked when entering this area, Jews and Arabs and tourists alike. In fact, years ago, I lived in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City. I had a habit of praying at the Western Wall each day. Every time I did so, I had to go through security. Each time, I thanked the security guards for ensuring my safety.
But the Atlanta Black Star claims these security “checkpoints” prevent the Afro-Palestinians (as opposed to the Palestinian-Palestinians) from earning a livelihood. How this works is a mystery since the explanation makes no sense. Until you realize that the entire article is an embroidered myth based on a piece that appeared in the Times of Israel, The Old City’s African Secret (http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-old-citys-african-secret/).
Interestingly, the Times of Israel article speaks at first of “African Muslims,” because that is what they are (as the article makes clear). They are “the descendants of Africans from Nigeria, Senegal, Sudan and Chad who made the pilgrimage to Mecca in recent generations, then visited Jerusalem, married Arab women and stayed.” Only later in the article do they suddenly become “Afro-Palestinians.”
Now, the Atlanta Black Star doesn’t call itself a news site, but rather “a narrative company” that strives to bring “a new level of consciousness” to those whose “values, personality and behaviors are in-congruent [sic] with those that are desired.” In other words, the Atlanta Black Star lies to you to change your ideology to conform with their own.
They excuse this by claiming that humans have used “narratives” A/K/A “lies,” for over 100,000 years! Of course, that’s simply another charming lie, er, “narrative” that fits in with their goal of publishing “empowering narratives for all people of African descent and everyone who adheres to our culture.”
This is probably the same narrative which states that all people are originally from Africa, which is something the leftists made up to remove our particularities as people, the things that make us different from one another. Because in the leftist world, everyone has to be the same.
Which is why the leftists hate Jews so much (the ones who won’t assimilate like the “normal” Jews who know darn well they came from Africa 100,000 years ago).
Anyway, what is interesting here is the disparity between the Times of Israel story and the Atlanta Black Star piece. The former places a particular stress on the fact that this group of black Muslims is treated as second class citizens by the Palestinian-Palestinians, while the latter stresses that the Jews are even meaner to the Afro-Palestinians than they are to the Palestinian-Palestinians. Naturally, this is all because of the Jewish “occupation.”
So here’s what’s got me scratching my head: Muslims who came to live in what was called “Palestine,” became “Palestinians,” whether their descent is from Chad, Nigeria, Senegal, Sudan, Syria, or Egypt, for example, while Jews who came to live in what was called “Palestine” (and were listed as “Palestinians” on their British Mandate ID cards), after sojourning in various parts of the world, are called “occupiers.”
If you look at history and artifacts, you are going to discover that the Jews were in this land called “Palestine” from way before it was called that. It’s these other people who are the real occupiers, while the Jews are actually the indigenous people of the territory in question.
But none of this matters when you’re creating a narrative that “empowers” people. Which accounts for the idea that there were people 100,000 years ago creating narratives. That would make those people older than the Jews, thus turning the Jews into “occupiers” while everyone else came from Africa.
Not that complicated at all, really. Or is it?
When you’re creating empowering narratives, it can be difficult to keep track of your lies, er, narration.
Hat tip: Lisa Sturman Melamed.