Talk:Pan-Arabism/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comment by Palmiro[edit]

Aflaq combined palingenetic socialism and Italian fascism with elements of 19th-century European anti-Semitism and xenophobic hatreds of other non-Arab nationalities, in particular Persians.

This is a rather unusual interpretation of Aflaq's politics. I've commented it out for the moment, unless someone wants to source it to a historian (or political opponent, or whatever) of some description I'll delete it. Palmiro | Talk 20:01, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

More info needed on some points[edit]

It is closely connected to Arab nationalism. Pan-Arabism has tended to be secular and often socialist, and has strongly opposed Western political involvement in the Arab world. Pan-Arabism is a form of ethnic nationalism.

Pan-arabism is connected to arab nationalism? Isn't it the same thing? What's the difference between them?

More importantly however, pan-Arabism, in the name of unity, has helped inspire pogroms against Non-Arab/Non-Muslim Minorities such as the persecution of Assyrian Christians in Iraq, and later of the Kurds.

Except that we should add berber to the list, why was this sentence removed? Is it wrong? Didn't the regime who claimed they were panarabic harmed these minorities?

For Aflaq, you might use this quote: "In this struggle we retain our love for all. When we are cruel to others, we know that our cruelty is in order to bring them back to their true selves, of which they are ignorant. Their potential will, which has not been clarified yet, is with us, even when their swords are drawn against us."

[Each Arab] "is forced to return to himself, to sink into his depths, to discover himself anew after experience and pain. At that point the true unity will be realized, and this is a new kind of unity different from political unity; it creates the unity of spirit among the individuals of the nation." Michel Aflaq source

--equitor 17:01, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Somalia?[edit]

Arab? In what way? They are Muslim yes, and use Arabic script, but Somalis are neither ethnically nor linguistically Arab. Cripipper 16:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for Ethnicity you have no knowledge unless u possess an advanced degree in anthropology or biochemistry as linguistically ever heard of the "Afro-Asiatic" language group fool, get your facts right man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.213.18 (talk) 16:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Somalis themselves see themselves as being of Arab descent and as clearly distinct from Black Africans.
As for linguistics, Somali is an Cushitic language, while Arabic is a Semitic language, both belonging to the larger Afro-Asiatic languages group. Most linguists believe that this language family as a whole originated somewhere in Northeastern Africa, with the Semitic subgroup spilling over to Arabia and other parts of the Middle East (see Afro-Asiatic languages#Original homeland (Urheimat) and date). Genetic evidence[1][2] suggests that Somalis, along with linguistically related groups such as the Oromo, form an own group distinct from other inhabitants of Sub-Saharan Africa and are genetically closer to Eurasians/Caucasoids/Arabs than other sub-Saharan Africans are. Béka (talk) 12:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging of Arab unification and Pan-Arabism??[edit]

Although there are understandable links between the two topics it has been noted that pan-arabism can incorporate arab peoples across the globe attempting not only to unify as a nation state but as an entity with which all can identify. Arab nationalism is generally confined to the Middle East and North Africa with the aim being an arab state incorporating much of the Middle East and North Africa into a cohesive and united nation. A popular theory for many years, there is unlikely to be a resolution and creation of such a state in the near future because of the difficulties in deciding who rules such a state. In the past Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia have all attempted to put themselves at the forefront of the arab nationalism movement by creating groups such as the Islamic Conference Organisation, yet all to little avail. (Hinnebusch, R. "The International Politics of the Middle East" Manchester University Press, 2003)

Therefore the two articles should be kept separate, witht he repeated information perhaps removed to make reading and use of the site quicker and easier. Bencgibbins 11:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say merge Aaliyah Stevens 18:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bencgibbins: First off, we're not talking about Arab nationalism, we're talking about "Arab Unification" -- which I fail to see how it is different from pan-Arabism. Can you please cite the exact quote from Hinnebusch? Unless someone can provide reliable sources showing that they are different things, they should be merged. Khoikhoi 04:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube[edit]

The current Pan-Arabist#External_links contains an excessive amount of YouTube links. Some (if not most) should be removed.Bless sins (talk) 01:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest reformat[edit]

I suggest moving and editing opposition to Pan-Arabism into a 'criticism' section. it's only natural for a political ideology to be compared to rivaling and opposed ones. This section should include non-arab minorities criticism (e.g. kurds, berbers), islamist opposition (Brotherhood, Qutb) and nationalist alternatives (Pan-Syrianism). MiS-Saath (talk) 16:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

merge[edit]

it's not good to merge Arab Unification with Pan-Arabism, because the different between both pages is very obvious, One is talking about an idea that some leaders was thinking to do, but the Pan-Arabism are a peole with in the arab people who is trying to force their covernments to accept this agenda!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah Alkendy (talk • contribs) 07:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources, please. Because the current definitions on these two pages are nearly identical. Khoikhoi 04:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I'm going to be bold and merge the pages. If anyone has any objections, please cite your sources showing me that the two subjects are different. Khoikhoi 20:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you were being bold, but maybe there should be some sort of consensus on whether the two articles should be merged or not. There seems to be some good reasoning to keep them separate in the "Merging of Arab unification and Pan-Arabism??" section above. User:Timstre —Preceding undated comment was added at 22:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've already responded to the "reasoning". The bottom line is that no one has provided any references proving that pan-Arabism and Arab Unification are two different things. See WP:BURDEN. Khoikhoi 22:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, it's fine with me if they're merged. Just making a suggestion. Anyway, I've added some info from the old Arab Unification article to Pan-Arabism. Tried to make sure nothing was repeated. User:Timstre —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, thanks. Khoikhoi 22:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Racism section?[edit]

It looks to me that the whole "Racism" section of the article is very nonobjective. It's also just a bunch of links to articles on other sites. I'm going to erase all of it; if someone thinks there should be a section on the possibility of pan-arabism being racist, it should be written in an objective fashion, and not just links. Timstre (talk) 02:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the "Anti-Jewish" section. Several parts of it in particular only discussed antisemitism in general as opposed to pan-Arabism, which is what this article is about. Khoikhoi 02:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What seems to be the problem why is there an attempt here by someone to make it appear as if the facts aren't neutra? is anyone disputing the facts that all thosoe cases occured/occur? or if it stems from militant Arabism?

Fatim1 (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the anti-jewish section before edited by Contrieng (talk) 14:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[edit]

Well, as promised, here comes my 2¢. Having read the section in question, it does seem totally dubious, badly written and a definite POV-push. I'm afraid I don't have enough knowledge on the subject matter to make any arguments for whether the section is valid or not, but it certainly should not remain in its current state – rewrite if there are valid arguments, remove if not. haz (talk) 16:37, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-jewish And general style of the article[edit]

It is more than obvious that the anti-jewish section is unencyclopedic. Here are some of the reasons:

1. The style is more of a news-flash.
2. It contains information poorly cited.
3. It is a strong point of view pushover.
4. There are some grammar mistakes and mistakes in punctuation. ( forgive me for mistakes in my own writing here)
5. It seems like this section is not about anti-jewish racism but instead an attack on arabs.
6. It contains dubious information that is apparently intended to misguide the reader.
7. IT DOES NOT BELONG IN PAN-ARABISM

Contrieng (talk) 14:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not more than anews flash than any other data on wiki.

Poorly cited? What does that mean? have you checked the links? I just did check most of them! IT DOES BELONG IN ARABISM or PAN-ARABISM! One should not cover for ANY racism, there is no excuse, which is why I haven't edited claims by Israeli Arabs of racism on other pages on wiki.

One should not be biased against Jews and apologize for anti Jewish racism by Arabism just because it doesn't sound nice, true info should be noticed & known.

If you check my contributions you will find that I post against Arabs being attacked in Europe. Fatim1 (talk) 18:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


OK Fatim1 here is where I disagree with you and my opinion in general:


First of all, it IS more of a news flash than all Wikipedia articles (at least all the ones I'm interested in or have seen). I don't know what Wikipedia articles you are talking about but even if other articles are also news-like, this does not make it OK. I cannot fix all the articles but I am trying to fix this one.


Second, I HAVE checked ALL the links in that section and what I meant by poorly cited is that most come from Israeli websites or websites by Jews. So what? Right? It's racism against THEM! Well, can't I claim that any person is racist against me and tell people stories about it? I surely can, but it would be wrong to believe me unless I have seen the racism first hand, or if it has been documented by NEUTRAL side. Where would that leave the people who I have accused? Can't they defend themselves from the accusations of being racist? Can't they explain that what is being conceived as racism is a REACTION to being victimized? I think they must be allowed to do that and THEN people can make educated judgements. Furthermore, I may be someone who claims people are against me and then I make websites about it and then I cite my own websites in Wikipedia, which makes the article a mere propaganda instrument.


Thirdly, it does NOT belong in pan-Arabism because all of the Arab League meetings in the past and also all pan-Arabism attempts have not had racist causes behind them (especially not against Jews) The first thoughts of pan-Arabism were inside the Ottoman Empire and they came to surface after Ottoman bad treatement of Arabs (Note that Ottomans and Arabs are Muslims). pan-Arabism was sought by Al-Sharif Hussein bin Ali and other Arab leaders during the Arab revolt in 1916 long before Israel existed. At that time, Arabs made alliances with the west against the Ottomans on order to unite Arabs. There were no bad feelings towards Jews and Muslim, Christian and Jew arabs all lived together and sought unity.

I am NOT trying to cover for any kind of racism as I am totally and sincerely against it. It is WRONG if any Muslim or any Arab or any person has any kind of prejudice against Jews or other people. The sole purpose of my edits was an attempt to present a more NEUTRAL perspective of the issue. I am not biased against Jews. I personally believe that all people must live together peacfully. Unfortunately, I have no proof for this as you don't know me and you may not believe all of what I am saying. Racism, of course, is not nice but I am not COVERING it and biased. I have beliefs, nut I am not biased.

Finally, I completely agree that true information must be known, and that is why my edits (at first) were only addition of information and I did not attempt any change in other claims. But then, people who oppose my views started deleting my additions for no apparent reasons and adding more biased points. I do acknowledge that some Arabs are racist just as some Jews are racist. Racism has no race.. if I may..

Thanks a lot..
Contrieng (talk) 21:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The complaints listed here are absurd, first automatically disquilifying a source because its Jewish is in and of itself racist. If you could find Jewish sources claiming Jews were treated as equals in Arab countries, or even Arab sources they could be added as a counter-weight to the accounts of Arab racism.
Second of all, Jews were always second class citizens in Arab countries under the best of circumstances. See the innumerable anti-Jewish laws in Arab countries, such as the law forbidding Jews from wearing shoes in Morocco, Or Jewish orphans being forcibly converted to Islam in Yemen, or the Hebron massacre of 1929, or the Farhud. All these existed before there was an Israel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Little penguin 613 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I can find sources about that, but it still does not belong here. See for example: [[3]] This is just an example, there are more. This also proves that jews were not second-class citizens under good circumstances. Dictatorships that kill their own people should not be examples about racism. They have no mercy to all humanity not just one race.Contrieng (talk) 22:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Alright, the problem is this is a discussion of Pan-Arab racism, a specific ideology which began in the 1800's well after Muslim Spain had ceased. The Golden age of Spain took place under a Islamic regime. While Pan-Arabism was and is heavily influenced by Islam they are not one and the same.
Secondly, even during the Golden Age of Spain, Jews were not equals. Jews were required to pay the Jizya, and the other Dhimmi laws in regards to what animals could be rode, what jobs Jews could pursue. As well as having inherently less value in judicial proceedings. Furthermore, if you look at the Jewish sources that lived during the era, they didnt view it as such a golden age. See the Rambam's Iggeret Taiman, or Rav Saadia Gaon.
Thirdly, this is one example, there have been many Arab and Arab-Islamic countries pointing to one; Spain, which the Jews view as being a time of suffering if lessened suffering, and which was not even a Pan-Arab state, is not a effective proof that Pan-Arab racism doesnt exist.
Fourth, if a dictatorship kills its own people because they are a specific "race" or ethnicity, that is racism, and the Hebron massacre took place under the British, and the Farhud was a Pogrom by the citizens of Iraq, not the government, but in both cases these massacres took place by Arabs motivated by Pan-Arabism.
Fifth, it is still racism to dismiss material simply because it is Jewish or Israeli.
Sixth, the documentary film the Silent Exodus by Pierre Rechov about the expulsions of Jews that took place in the Arab world following the establishment of the state of Israel is filled with original interviews from Jewish expellees, who often describe their treatement before there was a Israel as being very poor and motivated by racism. http://www.pierrerehov.com/exodus.htm. Now most of those interviewed are Jewish, but they were the victims of this persecution. My point being this is a objective documentary by a french filmmaker showing extensive evidence of Pan-Arab racism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Little penguin 613 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I did not dismiss the material "simply because it is jewish". If you look at the references of the "golden age artice" they are jewish. I checked the websites and I found them quite unreliable sources with strongly biased views. Anyway, despite the fact that I did not accept the reliability of the references, I made no effort to remove the claims. My edits were only an attempt to present a more neutral perspective and to formulate sentences in less offensive terms. Then due to attempts of vandalism AND other user's suggestions I came to believe that the section is OK by itself (with need for re-writing) but does not belong here.

I do recognize that pan-arabism is completely different (though closely related) from Islam. Yet, the golden age is still a proof that arabs in Spain (they were muslims AND Arabs) treated jews like equals (these are the true teachings of islam followed by arabs in spain)

I deny the fact that Arab-racism is a concept that started from the 1800s. This is just wrong! Arabs at that time were under othoman rule and themselves were struggling with othoman racism against them. they suffered from ignorance and discrimination and attempts to convert them to turks. They were in no position to be racist against jews. However, as soon as zionism came to surface claiming that an arab land is theirs, I can understand appropriate feelings towards zionists and not jews in general.

Jews were required to pay jizya as muslims were required to pay "Zakat". Another proof of equality. Also, this Jizya was much less than any other taxes they had to pay before. It is NOT right that they had less judicial rights because that is opposed to islamic teachings, though is stuff like marriage, dhimmi's go to their own churches or laws and do not follow Islamic law. The sources for the article I cited are jewish! "the jewish encyclopedia". Also, there are european (neutral) sources that claim the same things.


There seems to be a misunderstanding. So for the record I say: I do not claim at all that Arab-racism against jews does not exist. please read the last two paragraphs of my last argument (the long one).

As for the time of the british mandate. Massacares happened by jews and by arabs. It was kind of a civil war, two groups fighting against each other, not one group a racist and the other a victim. Also, the jews had no right in being there in the first place. The british according to balfour's promise decided to make a land for the jews in palestine. therefore arabs viewed those immigrants as invadors.

Dictators that kill their own people of the same religion and same race are not examples of racism. That is dictatorship not racism.

Jews were NOT expelled from Arab-lands, rather they were encouraged by othe Jews and Israeli's to immigrate to Israel just as Jews in europe, russia and america were. On the other hand there are many documentaries about the arab exodus by the Israeli's from their lands after the creation of israel on arab lands and after further occupation.Contrieng (talk) 11:15, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am Christian and I can tell you it's not just jews this is the most racist ideology ever known to man. LOL talk about denial jews were expelled from the Arab world from Iraq to Syria and my grandmother who is Egyptian told me how that racist scumbag Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled all the Egyptian Jews in the 1950s. Pan-ARabism is RACISM.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 21:19, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction?[edit]

The following:

There have been several attempts to bring about a Pan-Arab state by many well known Arab leaders that ultimately resulted in failure.

The first was the Arab Federation of Iraq and Jordan in 1958. It was a confederation between cousins King Faisal II of Iraq and King Hussein of Jordan. This federation fell apart after the Iraqi Army's coup d'etat.

The United Arab Republic in 1958 was the second attempt. Formed under Nasser, it was a union between Egypt and Syria. It lasted only until 1961 when an anti-Nasserist coup in Syria led to Syria's withdrawal from the union.

Seems to be in contradiction to the following:

During his early years, Faisal was tutored at the royal palace with several other Iraqi boys. As a teenager, Faisal attended Harrow School in the United Kingdom with his cousin, King Hussein of Jordan. The two boys were close friends, and reportedly planned early-on to merge their two realms, to counter what they considered to be the threat of militant pan-Arab nationalism. Their ultimate efforts in this direction would ironically lead to Faisal's downfall. and On February 1, 1958, neighbouring Syria joined with Nasser's Egypt to form the United Arab Republic. This prompted the Hashemite kingdoms of Iraq and Jordan to strengthen their ties by establishing a similar alliance. Two weeks later, on February 14, this league formally became the Arab Federation of Iraq and Jordan. Faisal, as the senior member of the Hashemite family, became its head of state. However, Faisal's reign, together with his new nation, would come to an abrupt end a mere five months later. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_II)

It appears that the United Arab Republic was an attempt at a Pan-Arabic State and the Arab Federation of Iraq and Jordan came later not so much as a Pan-Arabic State, but in response to one.

Uterm (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion (Please express your opinions)[edit]

I strongly suggest that the part about racism is moved to a new article with a proper title. This article is about pan-Arabism and the majority of it is not about pan-Arabism. What do you think? Contrieng (talk) 22:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I have explained repeatedly that the "anti-Jewish" section in particular violates WP:SYNTH, a sub-policy of WP:NOR. Most of that stuff is already covered in the Antisemitism in the Arab world and Racial antisemitism articles anyways. Khoikhoi 22:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?[edit]

I suspect that the user talk is vandalizing the article. He insists on making edits that contradict the general consensus of the article. For example, he made edits in a childish manner by adding "not" to some sentences to completely change the context.
Editors such as Khoi and myself suggest that the racism section be moved to a new article. Also, I have said over and over that the style of the "anti-Jewish" section (before I edited it) is not ethical. The user Khoi has decided to delete it and I agree with his action.
talk on the other hand is making changes without any discussion and you can see the way he addressed me on my talk page (I hope he doesn't delete it so you can't see it)
Please express what you think.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Contrieng (talk • contribs) 10:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

forking afd[edit]

see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti Jewish Arabism. --Soman (talk) 17:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be another one, Racism within Arabism, created at 04:44, 3 October 2008. T L Miles (talk) 01:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

al-watan al-arabi[edit]

It is quite strange that the concept of the arab nation (al-watan al-arabi) isn't explicitly mentioned in the article (with map). In not sure whether there should be a separate article on it or whether it should be fully covered in this one, though. --Soman (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject ratings[edit]

I think this article should be low in importance on the Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Palestine WikiProjects. This is because the ideology is contentious to many people in these countries and hasn't served the people of Iraq, Palestine or Lebanon particularly well in the past. Greater Syria (talk) 17:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it certainly hasn't although I don't really blame the idea itself, just the leaders, the governments, foreign interference and many other issues - internal and external. Either way, pan-Arabism has certainly affected these countries greatly over the course of the 20th century and to an extent the 19th and 21st centuries. High-importance might be pushing it, but it's certainly not of low-importance. I'll settle for mid-importance, but you still should bring this up on the talk pages of the concerned wikiprojects because editors there might hold different opinions. --Al Ameer son (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with that analysis Al-Ameer, a quick concensus we have formed. I'll set the ratings and leave notes on the WikiProject talk pages. Izzedine (talk) 03:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the mid-importance thingie, but seriously, the idea that because something was not exactly good or serve the people well it should receive low-imp is fairly ridiculous.
Cheers!
Λuα (Operibus anteire) 10:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Jimmy Carter is charged as paid by radical Arab-Islamic lobby[edit]

In reference to that ridiculous charge upon Pipes as being "paid by zionists lobby speaker" supposedly, here is my question, since so far I haven't heard refuting the charge that Jimmy Carter wrote his stuff being paid by radical Arab-Islamic lobby (Ex-President for sale), will Nableezy now therefor discredit EVERYHTING Jimmy Carter wrote? I am not here to defend Zionism or all they do, but it seems that this "discrediting" & labling a source as "unreliable" should be applied evenly across the board...

Toothie3 (talk) 02:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Dershowitz's personal opinion on Jimmy Carter is not something that I, or most rational people, take seriously. FrontPageMag is not a reliable source, I have provided links to 4 separate discussions at the reliable sources noticeboard that showed that. See WP:RS. nableezy - 02:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, your section heading is in violation of WP:BLP. Do not make such comments about living people on Wikipedia. nableezy - 02:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the heading as "charged" since I provided one (of many sources) that SAID that more harshly. Is your charge on Alan Dershowitz OK on wikipedia? (make such comments about living people on Wikipedia It seems funny for someone to claim of having the "authority" to speak for all rational people. BTW This is even more damning, We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News Will you now discredit anything BBC says on the middle east?

Toothie3 (talk) 02:57, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, the BBC is a reliable source on Wikipedia. You need to learn these things. Editorials are only acceptable for the views of the author, not for presenting their opinions as fact. Alan Dershowitz is a brilliant, brilliant man, I just happen to disagree with most of his views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and many, many people have questioned his competence in that arena. But none of this matters, is something sourced to Jimmy Carter in this article? Didnt think so. You are attempting to deflect from the actual issue here, the sources you have inserted into the article. You have used a collection of unreliable and primary sources to turn this article into a coat rack of opinions presenting a very biased view as fact. FrontPageMag is not a reliable source, they are no even a source worth quoting much less presenting the opinions of the authors who publish there as fact. The various random websites you have used as sources are likewise not reliable sources. We have certain standards about what is and what is not a reliable source on Wikipedia. We are not here to present a one-sided account based on shoddy sources and pass it off as gospel truth. Please go read WP:RS. nableezy - 03:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


actually its not just Dershowitz Robert Spencer has made the same claimants and other ppl infact there are several books (Not by dershowitz) that questions his motives aswell and relate him to the rise of Radical Islam http://www.amazon.com/Real-Jimmy-Carter-Ex-President-Undermines/dp/0895260905/ref=pd_sim_b_4 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0935199330/ref=cm_rdp_product http://www.amazon.com/Jimmy-Carter-Liberal-World-Chaos/dp/0935199330/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267288404&sr=1-5 http://www.amazon.com/Accuse-Jimmy-Carter-Militant-Islam/dp/1930754388/ref=sr_1_25?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267288489&sr=1-25 http://www.amazon.com/Crisis-President-Prophet-Shah-1979-Militant/dp/0316323942/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267288513&sr=1-9

an article by the Washington times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/dec/20/20061220-092736-3365r/ ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism & attempts of suppressing voices decrying Pan Arabism's racism[edit]

The continuous attack on the subject by supporters of Pan Arabism's exclusivity only reaffirms once again its racism, its disapproval of non-Arab or non- "pure" Arab minorities in the middle east.

Well, of course Nableezy will try (pushing POV) in an UNRELIABLE way discredit the sources, supposedly...

The middle east does NOT "belong" just to pure 100% Arabs (nor does Africa's Sudan or Chad where Gaddafi's legend and current Al-Bashir/Janjaveeds resulted in so many victims of the racist genocide in our time), it's a home for many diverse groups.

Time for all oppressed minorities under this racist & fascist ideology to have a voice, let us remind Nableezy that this forum is not a pan Arab dictatorship system where suppressing voices is the norm, its a free for all media.

On the contrary, such actions to shut mouths, only stimulate the oppressed to be more vocal.

I can't understand why Nableezy's vandalism is tolerated.

PS I was actually quite mild in my edits because it (Pan Arabism) starts off with describing it as a form of "unity" when in fact it's all a BUNCH OF CRAP! Pan Arabism has in the past & present been more about anti the other than "pro" Arab. Hence - racism again.

Toothie3 (talk) 02:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are using unreliable sources to push a POV, largely through original research and partly by giving undue weight to selected quotes. And I have not vandalized an article in my entire time here, saying that I have is a personal attack. Also is your accusation of racism which I strongly urge you to retract. I am not one to complain about civility, but if you call me a racist one more time I will ask that you be blocked. nableezy - 01:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism that speaks valume of intolerance[edit]

Interesting to note a perfect example of this very Pan Arab intolerance, the Kuwaiti IP address [4] has edited one edit whereby the only change he made was omitting one word "Jews" (from the list of victims of racism by Areabism, the group which is probably on the top of the list of "favorite" non-Arab victims by racist radical Pan-Arabists) [5]. 'Nuff said.

Whether that IP is used by one of the editors (sock puppet) here remains to be known by the admin...

Toothie3 (talk) 01:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Issues[edit]

A partial list of the problem with these sources

  1. Where in the source cited ([http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Totalitarianism-Hannah-Arendt/dp/0156701537]) does it say that Pan-Arabism is the "source and origin of political totalitarianism" in the Arab world?
  2. This source does not load anything.
  3. Why should the opinion of this single person cited to this source be in the article? And how does this open letter qualify as a reliable source?
  4. How is this a reliable source?
  5. Why is the home page for the JCPA being cited, what information does it contain?
  6. What does this source say about anything? And how is this paper a reliable source?
  8. FrontPageMag is not a reliable source, this has been dealt with a number of times in the past ( #1, #2, #3, #4)
  9. What does this support? Nothing but the abstract that says almost nothing shows up.
  10. this is not a reliable source
  11. What does this source say about pan-Arabism? not about the Mufti (for who you also give a very one-sided and inaccurate representation to)

nableezy - 03:27, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lanternix or Yasmina, would you care to respond to the issues raised with the source you have cited? And Lanternix, would you care to explain why you have chosen this article to continue your campaign or denying that Egyptians are Arabs, filling this article with things wholly unrelated? nableezy - 04:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They are very much related. I am not continuing anything. I am improving this poor article. You should be thanking me for cleaning it up rather than pointing fingers! --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 04:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could you respond to the issues with the sources you have reinserted into the article. And the sources determine if they are related, not you, but we'll deal with that later. nableezy - 04:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the sources determine if they are related, not you. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 04:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could you respond to the issues with the sources you have reinserted into the article? nableezy - 04:40, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All of you have had enough time to keep editing the article but not answer these issues. I will be removing these from the article again unless you van show they meet the requirements of policy. nableezy - 14:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What issues? You are trying to cover up reasonable and well sourced information , I've deleted the dead links and sourced what you cited as not realible with more sources. So try another move, since crying racism before didnt seem to work either ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 16:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did not "cry racism". And there are a number of issues still unaddressed:
  1. Where in The origins of totalitarianism (which you now for some reason cite twice side by side) does it say that Pan-Arabism is "the source and origin of political totalitarianism" in the Arab world? The other source, from the American Chronicle, only says "pan-Arab" in the title, never once giving any support to what it is supposedly referencing. Also, the American Chronicle is not exactly a reliable source, see here and here.
  2. The next line in the lead is"It is also considered to encourage antisemitism against Jews, and is believed to have led to a rise of persecution of and attacks against Mizrahi Jews in Arabic speaking countries, which led to the disappearance of their community in Middle-Eastern countries other than Israel". This is cited to this website. The website contains an editorial by Magdi Allam. An opinion piece may not be used to make a statement of fact and that is what is being done here, and there are many, many reasons for Jews either leaving or being expelled from Arab territories, not just the one you are trying to pass off as gospel truth.
  3. You are still using FrontPageMag in this article, that is not an acceptable source as you can see from the links I provided above.
  4. This is not a reliable source.
  5. This has nothing to do with pan-Arabism
  6. This is not a reliable source.
  7. This is not even a source, it is just the homepage of the think-tank
  8. this does not load anything
These are just a few of the problems with your additions, there are many more. The other problem is the massive amount of WP:original research, mostly by synthesis, you and Lanternix have placed in the article. Can you give me a single reliable source relating Amin al-Husayni's "ties" with the Nazis to pan-Arabism itself? If not then none of this crap should be in the article. Also, the undue weight you have given random people who have no business being quoted in an encyclopedia. Why is Masri Feki being quoted in this article? Why is some random Egyptian at a bus stop being quoted in the article? You are placing a large amount of weight on these primary sources and non-notable opinions. I will be going through this article again and cleaning it from the nonsense the three of you have placed in it. This is an encyclopedia article, not a rant about how bad the A-rabs are. nableezy - 17:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of continuing to edit-war, could whoever wants this material in the article please address the issues above? nableezy - 22:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cant do anything to the sources if a Vandal keeps reverting everything written.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 23:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page has since been protected, there will be no more edit-warring. In the meantime, can we come to some sort of agreement on the above list? Do you dispute the sources I listed above are unreliable? nableezy - 23:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I have no problem with that, but first i see if I can find more sources to go with the article, then ill get back to you about the sources. Btw the French article about the berbers is RELEVANT it cites Kabyle people's complaints of Arabist-Islamists threatening them & their culture.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 23:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time (but not too long), nobody is editing the page for a week. nableezy - 23:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would just like to say that following the blocking of IP (166.217.93.234), that another one (166.217.93.174) did the same thing. I was not surprised they are from the same network (mobile-166-217-093-xxx.mycingular.net ) - I would suspect he logged off and on again. Therefore you need to have a good idea here of what needs to be added/deleted before the protection runs out, as it is a reasonable assumption that he will return. A good consensus here will assist in the work of the vandal fighters in keeping the page correct.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:48, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. nableezy - 23:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Intimidation & censorship[edit]

Dear Nableezy, please try and be civil, I did not call you a racist, and don't try to intimidate people & their voices by threats of (desperate acts, lie) asking to block one's access. When I said "its racism" I was talking about Pan Arabism, too bad that you support this ideology so blindly you can't take the criticism of the victims of its racism, one can be not a racist perse but supports an ideology that is in fact racist while he/she doesn't even realize it is as such.

Toothie3 (talk) 01:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote above The continuous attack on the subject by supporters of Pan Arabism's exclusivity only reaffirms once again its racism. You directed that at me. That is an implicit accusation of racism. nableezy - 01:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See more on Nableezy's repeated attenpts to block me and censor [6]

Toothie3 (talk) 17:45, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

al-Husayni[edit]

A source relating whatever it is you want to say about al-Husayni to the topic of this article, pan-Arabism, is needed for that information not to fail WP:SYNTH. What exactly does the picture of al-Husayni meeting with Hitler have to do with pan-Arabism? What does the picture of Himmler's telegram have to do with pan-Arabism? What does the picture of al-Husayni saluting Bosnian troops have to do with pan-Arabism? The answer to all of these questions is nothing and the images should be removed. And al-Husayni was neither a "collaborator" nor a "close confidant" of Hitler. And this is not a reliable source. nableezy - 01:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was Hitler & the Nazis that appointed him to be the Pan Arab leader, it is very much related. Toothie3 (talk) 02:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That is absolutely not true. And even if it were, without a source connecting the topics it would be original research. nableezy - 02:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresenting sources[edit]

This source is used to support There was a wide Nazi propaganda in Pan-Arabist ideology. The problem is that the source (excerpts of reviews of a book published by Yale University Press) does not say that. The closest it comes is

Herf shows how Nazis employed media in Arabic – such as short-wave radio – to win the Middle East. The dreadful impact of this propaganda has been the pan-Arab nationalist adoption of Nazi ideology. On the top of this impact is the pan-Arab adoption of Nazi anti-Semitism. Therefore, Herf’s book focuses on this issue, analyzing original materials and providing new insights.

The source would support wording such as Nazi influence over Arab media led to strains of Nazi ideology, such as anti-semitism, to influence pan-Arabism. nableezy - 01:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More reliable sources on the Mufti, his Pan Arabism & Hitler / Nazis[edit]

from: "The Mufti and the Fuehrer: the rise and fall of Haj Amin el-Husseini‎" p. 121 Joseph B. Schechtman - Biography & Autobiography - 1965 the Mufti was looked upon as the leader of the pan-Arab community in exile.

(from The 'Untited States Holocaust Memorial Museum') Muhammad Amin al-Husayni... the Mufti establishment of a pan-Arab federation or state.

(The Gramsci Factor: 59 Socialists in Congress By Chuck Morse p. 113) the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, was a major participant in the Holocaust... the Mufti became a paid agent of the Nazi Abwher... the Mufti proceeded to Berlin where he was appointed by the Nazis as titular head of a Nazi-pan Arab government in exile.

[http://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Propaganda-Arab-World-ebook/dp/B0030MIDNQ Amazon.com: Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World eBook: Jeffrey Herf Icon of Evil: Hitler's Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam ... On the top of this impact is the pan-Arab adoption of Nazi anti-Semitism].

Toothie3 (talk) 03:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the point. You are connecting topics and synthesizing in a way that the sources do not. Yes, the Mufti was a leader among the pan-Arab movement. Yes, he had contact with Hitler and members of the SS. You are then connecting the two things into one, that his being a leader in the pan-Arab movement is related to Nazism. The first source does not say anything about that, neither does the second, and what you are quoting is not in the last source, it is in a review of that book. And I already addressed the phrasing of that in the section above #Misrepresenting sources. The third source is self-published, ie not a reliable source (see WP:SPS). nableezy - 03:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The connection was made already prior to our edits of course, it's out there in the links (here and in those already brought inside the Pan Arabism page quoting explicitly as he was appointed by the Nazis to the pan Arab leader, for example in the above ("he was appointed by the Nazis as titular head of a Nazi-pan Arab government in exile"), but all throughout the links you get the theme, you find the:

1) TIME when he was made a PAN ARAB leader (though he was of course the epitome of the combination of both forms of bigotry, radical Islam and radical Pan Arabism, something in the line of the Tunisian Human Rights activist Bechri as pan Arabism and pan Islamism being the twin fascisms that dominate the middle east [7])

2) recognized backed by whom - the Nazis!

Don't know what you keap repeating yourself without contributing anything against this historic facts (or against the factual Pan arabism's racist persecution past & present for that matter).

Toothie3 (talk) 04:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the source you are quoting from is self-published, it is not a reliable source. And there is no reason why we should give such weight to a random Tunisian as to quote him in the article. And even if we did, it would be his view, not a fact. nableezy - 04:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This fake argument can be said on ANY known Human Rights Activist, the point is that just because YOU don't agree with him, does not make it a non-fact, he should BE QUOTED.

Toothie3 (talk) 05:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not a "fake" argument, and if the best you have is MEMRI quoting him then he does not merit being quoted in the article. nableezy - 14:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So now the MEMRI translating Arab media is not "relaible" HAHA! Would you prefer the original Arabic version to be copied here on Wikipedia? there's really no end to the excuses.

Toothie3 (talk) 18:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have a problem parsing what I wrote. MEMRI's translation is not the issue, the issue is that you are trying to give undue weight to something that secondary sources have not given that weight to, read WP:WEIGHT. nableezy - 19:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BBC, NYTimes, CNN, Dailymail sources of Pan Arab Arabization & discrimination, totalitarianism[edit]

Here are some of the BBC, NYTimes, CNN, Dailymail sources of Pan Arab bigoted Arabization, discrimination, totalitarianism:

Toothie3 (talk) 05:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In order:
  1. This is not an article on "Arabisation", it is an article on pan-Arabism, the political ideology that the Arab states should be united. That source would be useful in another article, but not this one.
  2. That one is fine and should be included
  3. What does that have to do with anything?
  4. What does that have to do with anything?
  5. What does that have to do with anything? You want to include that in the article on the Baath Party go ahead
  6. That source could be used, but not in the way that you think. That source says that the Arab governments have "spent years suppressing" "pan-Arab Islamic militancy". The quote by Lufit says the current, ie not pan-Arabist, Arab governments have no legitimacy, not that pan-Arabism has no legitimacy.
  7. Editorial by Melanie Phillips. Get real. Not a RS for anything other than what Melanie Phillips thinks.
nableezy - 15:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess if the editorial would be by an Arab supporting Pan Arabism it would be OK... is it that Melanie's background is not OK? or is she paid by a non-Arab lobby maybe?

Toothie3 (talk) 18:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:RS, editorials and opinion pieces are only reliable for the opinion of the writer, not for statements of fact. nableezy - 19:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion[edit]

The games playing attempts of discrediting because of an agenda[edit]

First you try and tell us that one particular site is "not" reliable. Then by your own admission your supposed reasoning of "discrediting" Campus Watch beacuse ONE writer is 9according to your POV personal belief) "paid'... you failed to answer why Jimmy Carter (BLP vio redacted) is "relaible").

Then when quoting from a common source which you "agree" to be relaible, you project that you don't "like" him/her saying that.

Or you try to belittle the person as being non worthy (like Tunisian Human Rights activist, even though he appeared saying that in Arab mainstream media) of being quoted or "non rational".

What's next?

LOL @ the Jimmy Carter remark but there is a valued complaint that I can see here its not just with this article its just as worse with the Nasserism article or anything invovled with the Arab nationalism ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 19:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did not call the Tunisian human rights activist "non-rational". Please dont misrepresent what I have said. And you are continuing to violate WP:BLP in your remarks about Jimmy Carter. nableezy - 19:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arabism's fascism[edit]

- From the NYTimes the pan-Arabist Futuwwa Youth was a model of the Hitler Youth [8].

- More from the NYTimes "The most radical of the Pan-Arabists openly admired the Nazis and pictured their proposed new caliphate as a racial victory of the Arabs over all other ethnic groups" [9].

- Book: Rethinking nationalism in the Arab Middle East (- by James P. Jankowski, I. Gershoni - 1997 - History - 372 pages, published by Columbia University Press) p. 18

- Pan-Arab radicalism was expressed in diverse forms in 1930s Iraq. In 1935 the "Muthana Club" was established in Baghdad and rapidly became a forum for the educated from all parts of the Arab world and a center for the dissemination of Arab nationalist propaganda. Nationalist radicalization was also evident in the formation, in the late 1930s, of s paramilitary youth movement [al-futuwwa] modeled on fascist and Nazi youth organizations, sponsored by the government and officially instituted in Iraqi schools [10]

- Muslim schools that were directed by the Maqasid Islamic Charitable Association provided Najada a pool of potential members. As a Muslim 'twin' to the Phalangists, as the organization was often described, Najjada adopted a pan-Arab nationalist vision, calling for a suppression of all foreign influences. The ambivalent relation of such pan- Arab concepts to ethnocentric and racial nationalism became visible in its slogan 'Arabism above all' (al-'uruba fawqa al-jami').[11], Najjada (Helpers)... pan-Arabism... since at least 1933 newspapers had been printing Hitler's speeches and excerpts from Mein Kampf. Hitler and Mussolini were viewed in both Syria and Lebanon as models of strong statebuilders... Nasuli criticized "moral chaos" in public life and adopted the motto "Arabism Above All" on his newspaper's masthead, which also printed glowing accounts of German youth's support of Hitler [12] (Colonial Citizens By Elizabeth Thompson p. 193), 'the Helpers' fascist style organization was emphasising Islam and Arabism ('The Near East since the First World War' By Malcolm Yapp p. 113). [13].

- A number of ex-Sharifians incorporated Pan-Arabism into the platforms of clique-based political parties, such as Yasin ... in the al-Muthanna Club, whose members, heavily influenced by European fascism, formed the core of new radicals for the civilian-military Pan-Arab coalition led by Yunis al-Sab'awi and Salah al-Din al-Sabbagh. [14], From the book: 'The modern history of Iraq' (Phebe Marr - 2003) p. 52: Pan-Arab sentiments were strongly influenced by German ideas of nationalism and were encouraged by Fritz Grobba, German (Nazi) minister in Baghdad until 1939 [15].

- Hitler's new army of Arab fascists that would conquer the Arabian Peninsula and, from there, on to Africa--grand dreams." [16]

- Some of the new nationalist regimes which developed in the Middle East during the second half of the century exhibited more of the characteristics of fascism than those of any other part of the world. A first example was the Egyptian regime under Nasser, with its Fuhrerprinzip... Libyan dictatorship of Muammar al-Gadhafi a fanatical Muslim... "Brother Colonel" has renounced capitalism, preaching pan-Arabism and a form of "Arab socialism" while his interest in militarism, violence. [17]

- Frank Gervasi: King Farouk, Egyptian nationalism soon identified itself spiritually with its Nazi and Fascist counterparts, and developed into Pan-Arabism [18]

- Key among these Gestapo men was Fritz Grobba, Berlin’s envoy to the Middle East, and often called "the German Lawrence" because he promised a Pan-Arab state stretching from Casablanca to Tehran [19]

- In 1947, Non-Sectarian Anti-Nazi League to Champion Human Rights published memorandum for the Assembly of the United Nations, November, 1947: "Pan-Arab propaganda, its pro-fascist and pro-Nazi aspects in America" [20]

- Pan-Arabism actively supported Hitler's "achievements" in Europe and collaborated with him against the British in the Middle East during the war. An ideology tailor-made for Arab military men it dreamed of the creation of a modern and unified Arab-fascist nation. [21]

- From the book: Inside Pan-Arabia. BY mj STEINER. (Chicago: Packard and Company. 1947 [22]) page 157: Italy's prestige in the Near East ran high as a result of Mussolini's propaganda and Fascist gold.

- From the book: "Language planning and policy in Africa: Algeria, Côte d'Ivoire by Robert B. Kaplan, Richard B. Baldauf - 2007 - 308 pages, pt 69
Messali spent several spells in prison or exile. As an expatriate, he lived six months in Switzerland (1935-1936) where he met Emir Chekib Arslan - a Pan-Arabist from the Lebanese aristrocarcy, well known for his sympathy for Nazi ideology and a yearning for the re-creation of an Arab kingdon led by a 'King of all the Arabs'... Messali's association with Arslan strengthened the former's adherence to Pan-Arabism and Arab-Islamic ideology
[...] There were, on the one hand moderates... eaded by Messaly himself who believed that the birth of Algeria coincided with the Arab invasion and the spread of Islam - their slogan: an 'Arab-Islamic Algeria'. On the other hand, there were ... of Kabylian origin - who rejected such a national conception as simplistic, racist and imperialist. They called for more secularism and an 'Algerian Algeria'. They believed that, in addition to the Arabic and Islamic constituent parts, Algerianness should also include Berber, Turkish and... French... the government's aim was to appease the religious fundamentalists and the Pan-Arabists. The RCD declared the law of total Arabisation to be racist and a prelude to bringing the Islamists of the FIS to power. [23]

Toothie3 (talk) 05:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Samples of Arabism's racism[edit]

  • In General

From The Guardian:
Minority rights? No thanks! When so many people face oppression in the Middle East, is there any point in focusing on the rights of minorities?... As Mr Feki rightly pointed out in his talk, ethnic and religious diversity is something that pan-Arab nationalists and, more recently, Islamists, have tried to obliterate. [24]


  • From the book by G. Prunier, Darfur: The Ambiguous Genocide (Cornell University Press, 2005, ISBN 0-8014-4450-0) p. 45, Gaddhafi's “Arab Gathering” jammu al-Arabia - "a militantly racist and pan-Arabist organization which stressed the 'Arab' character of the province."

[25]


By Jim Hoagland Sunday, April 10, 2005; Page B07 Dear Saddam, [...] But the moment represents much more. This is matrix-breaking stuff, Saddam. It is the nail in the coffin for the racist myth of pan-Arabism that you (okay, okay, you and others) propagated to justify brute force as the lowest common denominator of power in the Middle East. Your claim to defend "Arabism" by persecuting the Kurds (and going to war against the Persians in Iran) ... Here's my point: The Middle East is a giant mosaic of religious and ethnic minorities that have until now known only how to persecute or be persecuted. Frequently the claim of cultural, political and religious cohesiveness contained in pan-Arabist ideology such as yours is put forward to mask the true diversity and conflicts of the people known as Arabs.
Suppressing diversity is what you were all about. The same is true for your ideological brothers yet personal enemies, the ruling Baathists in Syria, who represent a minority Alawite sect that can rule only by force. No wonder they see themselves as imperiled by democracy arriving next door. Let's hope for once they are right.]



  • African activist extensively on the racism, on Arabization & persecution of non-Arabs [26]



The displacement of Jews from Arab countries was not just a backlash to the creation of Israel and the Arabs' humiliating defeat. The "push" factors were already in place. Arab League states drafted a law in November 1947 branding their Jews as enemy aliens. But non-Muslim minorities, historically despised as dhimmis with few rights, were already being oppressed by Nazi-inspired pan-Arabism and Islamism. These factors sparked the conflict with Zionism, and drive it to this day. [27]

Toothie3 (talk) 01:07, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pan-Arabism/Archive_1&oldid=1142443660"