Friday, November 30, 2007

Israeli apartheid officially acknowledged

Finally a serving Israeli prime minister has admitted what critics of Israel could hitherto only say at the risk of being labelled anti-semites: that Israel is an apartheid state and owes its survival to being undemocratic by denying its Palestinian citizens equal rights.
At the eve of yet another peace conference doomed to failure like all those previous US-sponsored half-baked and half-hearted peace initiatives we have seen come and go over the past century, Ehud Olmert warned of a "South African-style struggle" which Israel would lose if a Palestinian state was not established. For once there is a recognition that playing games with Palestinian aspirations does not, ultimately, help in denying their legitimate rights in the occupied territories. Previous peace conferences have been a cover up for continued Israeli expansion on the land it occupied illegally, each time squeezing the indigenous population a little more. When a Palestinian state was eventually established in name only, with no independence whatsoever, not territorial or tax authority and, of course, no army of its own, there was the hope on the Israeli side that this token acknowledgment that the Palestinian people did exist (something denied by previous Zionist hawks) together with an attempted collaboration with a Palestinian puppet government would contain the uprising. As Olmert know seems to acknowledge, those plans came to nothing.
Meanwhile Israel's economy would long have collapsed but for the steady stream of American dollars to prop it up. And then there is the "demographic threat to Israel as a Jewish state from a faster growing Palestinian population", to cite Olmert, an admission that even in Israel itself, never mind the illegally occupied territories, Israel is having difficulties containing its non-Jewish population. This is why people who understand the region, unlike those so-called champions for Palestine who work into the hands of the Zionists, have repeatedly asked for a one-state solution. "If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights, then, as soon as that happens, the State of Israel is finished", Olmert is quoted as saying. In other words, Israel as a Jewish apartheid state has not yet been "wiped off the map" (to quote another recently popular phrase attributed to the Iranian president), because it is undemocratic. The "one person, one vote" maxim generally accepted around the globe now, is anathema to Jewish supremacists.
Olmert's recent warnings will be a hard nut for pro-Israeli leftists to chew. In the above comment he considers a South-African struggle for equal voting rights as negative and a threat to the existence of Israel as a purely Jewish (and thus racist) state. How will the left, who always supported the struggle against apartheid in South Africa but sat on the fence when it came to Israel, now continue to justify the ongoing oppression of the Palestinian people by Israel and its sponsor, the United States?
Olmert has done us a great favour. He said what we weren't supposed to say and got coverage for what would have been ignored, or denounced as anti-semitic, had it be said by anyone else. Those opposed to oppression, occupation and apartheid should see things as clearly as he does and call for a one state solution.


At 30 November 2007 at 13:54, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is Israel really a racist state? ...Or is it that they are simply fighting for survival as a people? It is no secret that the Islamic world to the north, south, and the east despise the Jews of Israel. Is this not too racist?

At 30 November 2007 at 19:42, Blogger Mustaqim said...

Maybe they despise them for the brutality of their oppression and their arrogance? Just like the Africans despised the White supremacist apartheid regime. Was that also racist? When Jews were persecuted and expelled by the Catholic Spanish inquisition, Muslims in North Africa and the Middle East gave them refuge with open arms. Since Jews became identified with that racist secular ideology of Zionism, they have abused that hospitality and outlived their welcome. Had they distanced themselves from those racist Zionists, the Arabs and other Muslims would still consider their cousins and neighbours. But when your guest starts throwing you out of your own house you are bound to get irritated!

At 1 December 2007 at 07:22, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent and concise analysis as usual.

At 5 December 2007 at 03:08, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I guess that depends on what you call "your house". That's the dispute we're really talking about isn't it? How is Israel the home of Islam? How is Jerusalem, the home of Islam? Exactly how did the Islam religion decide that Israel was its home? Was it when Mohammed first went on his barbaric "crusades" across the "holy land", slaughtering anyone who didn't convert to Islam? Oh, I forgot. There is that small little detail about the heavy tax laid upon those who rejected Islam, but wanted to live. So tell me, how is it truly a religion of peace, and a religion for the people if it either kills or taxes those who reject it. I mean, there is no proof that Allah (Muslim) or God (Jew/Christian) exists is there? This is the most ridiculous conflict in the history of mankind. Two, well, really three religions that can't come together to agree on the same beliefs; none of which can prove that their god exists, NONE!!

So who's land is it? Can you prove to me it is that of the Muslims? Or is it simply what you have been taught to believe, about a god you cannot prove exists?

At 7 December 2007 at 01:39, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's the home of Palestinians! It has been their home even before judaism christianity and islam where born and still is despite the zionist occupation. Palestinians converted to christianity and islam in later stages of their history, how, who and what was used to convert them to either religion doesn't make them less worthy of their ancient roots. No Zio-Fascist or masturbated idiot such as yourself no matter how twisted they can be, can ever deny a people their identity.
" Muhammed Crusades " ?????? Oh boy ...forgive my mistake.... you are not a masturbated idiot as previously thought, apparently you are just an accident.


Post a Comment

<< Home