Images & Words

Nothing more to add, except sorrow for the oppressed and the deceived.

Blue Ibis

*******************************************************


(c) Safael

There Is Apartheid in Israel

Shulamit Aloni
Arab News
Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:24 EST

Jewish self-righteousness is taken for granted among ourselves to such an extent that we fail to see what's right in front of our eyes. It's simply inconceivable that the ultimate victims, the Jews, can carry out evil deeds. Nevertheless, the State of Israel practices its own, quite violent, form of apartheid with the native Palestinian population.

The US Jewish establishment's onslaught on former President Jimmy Carter is based on his daring to tell the truth which is known to all: Through its army, the government of Israel practices a brutal form of apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp. All this is done in order to keep an eye on the population's movements and to make its life difficult. Israel even imposes a total curfew whenever the settlers, who have illegally usurped the Palestinians' land, celebrate their holidays or conduct their parades.

If that were not enough, the generals commanding the region frequently issue further orders, regulations, instructions and rules (let us not forget: They are the lords of the land). By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing "Jewish only" roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night - all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order - this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing (other) drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some anti-Semitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that apartheid exists here?"

Indeed apartheid does exist here. And our army is not "the most moral army in the world" as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention center and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough, that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved "for Jews only", on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an "ingenious proposal": Humanitarian activists cannot transport Palestinians either

Maj. Gen. Naveh, renowned for his superior patriotism, has issued a new order. It prohibits the conveyance of Palestinians without a permit. The order determines that Israelis are not allowed to transport Palestinians in an Israeli vehicle (one registered in Israel regardless of what kind of number plate it carries) unless they have received explicit permission to do so. The permit relates to both the driver and the Palestinian passenger. Of course none of this applies to those whose labor serves the settlers. They and their employers will naturally receive the required permits so they can continue to serve the lords of the land, the settlers.

Did man of peace President Carter truly err in concluding that Israel is creating apartheid? Did he exaggerate? Don't the US Jewish community leaders recognize the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966, to which Israel is a signatory? Are the US Jews who launched the loud and abusive campaign against Carter for supposedly maligning Israel's character and its democratic and humanist nature unfamiliar with the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of Nov. 30, 1973? Apartheid is defined therein as an international crime that among other things includes using different legal instruments to rule over different racial groups, thus depriving people of their human rights. Isn't freedom of travel one of these rights?

In the past, the US Jewish community leaders were quite familiar with the meaning of those conventions. For some reason, however, they are convinced that Israel is allowed to contravene them. It's OK to kill civilians, women and children, old people and parents with their children, deliberately or otherwise without accepting any responsibility. It's permissible to rob people of their lands, destroy their crops, and cage them up like animals in the zoo. From now on, Israelis and international humanitarian organizations' volunteers are prohibited from assisting a woman in labor by taking her to the hospital. (Israeli human rights group) Yesh Din volunteers cannot take a robbed and beaten-up Palestinian to the police station to lodge a complaint. (Police stations are located at the heart of the settlements.) Is there anyone who believes that this is not apartheid?

Jimmy Carter does not need me to defend his reputation that has been sullied by Israelophile community officials. The trouble is that their love of Israel distorts their judgment and blinds them from seeing what's in front of them. Israel is an occupying power that for 40 years has been oppressing an indigenous people, which is entitled to a sovereign and independent existence while living in peace with us. We should remember that we too used very violent terror against foreign rule because we wanted our own state. And the list of victims of terror is quite long and extensive. We do limit ourselves to denying the (Palestinian) people human rights. We not only rob them of their freedom, land and water. We apply collective punishment to millions of people and even, in revenge-driven frenzy, destroy the electricity supply for one and half million civilians. Let them "sit in the darkness" and "starve".

Employees cannot be paid their wages because Israel is holding 500 million shekels that belong to the Palestinians. And after all that we remain "pure as the driven snow". There are no moral blemishes on our actions. There is no racial separation.

There is no apartheid. It's an invention of the enemies of Israel. Hooray for our brothers and sisters in the US! Your devotion is very much appreciated. You have truly removed a nasty stain from us. Now there can be an extra spring in our step as we confidently abuse the Palestinian population, using the "most moral army in the world".

- Shulamit Aloni served as Israel's minister for education under Yitzhak Rabin. Aloni is a Laureate of the Israel Prize given by the State of Israel. She was awarded it in 2000 for her lifetime work. The source of this article is Yediot Acharonot, Israel's largest circulating newspaper through its associate Hebrew website Ynet. (It was never placed on the English site, Ynetnews.) Translated from Hebrew by Sol Salbe.

The Swarm: Zionist Attack Technique Revealed!

From Signs of the Times Best of the Web. A dissection of the methods used to marginalize anyone who dare to criticize the Zionist agenda. Currently former President Jimmy Carter is being subjected to this cowardly approach, used only when rational discussion would expose the attackers for the liars and hypocrites they are.

Read and empower yourself.

Blue Ibis

*****************************************

Carter and the Swarm

Israel Shamir
www.israelshamir.net
Sun, 28 Jan 2007 12:01 EST


Publication of Jimmy Carter's Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid is a great event for America and for all of us. It's not that Carter had said something we did not know about Palestine. Before Carter came, we knew that the Zionists established a racist apartheid regime in the Holy Land where Jews have rights, and goyim have duties. Before Carter came we knew a native Palestinian has no right to vote, move, work freely in his land, that he is locked up behind the twenty-foot wall. Before Carter came we knew that the US support allowed the atrocities to occur and the apartheid regime to entrench. But we did not know that there are prominent Americans who would dare the wrath of organised Jewry and spell it out loud.

Why did President Carter do it? Why did he risk his peaceful old age and gently fading glory to endure an attack of Israel's Fifth Column as merciless as the Four Columns' onslaught on Gaza? He was moved by compassion, by this supreme Christian virtue of feeling together with the suffering and the oppressed. He saw the suffering of Palestine and he could not keep his quiet. He upheld a honourable American tradition: that of Mark Twain who condemned the US atrocities in Philippines, that of Henry Thoreau speaking against the Mexican War. This is a universal tradition, too: Multatuli unmasked the Dutch atrocities in Indonesia, Roger Casement did it to the Belgians in Congo, Radishchev bewept the fate of a Russian peasant. And their voices changed our world, though not immediately. Carter is not a radical; a man of hotter temper would call to terminate the infamy called «The Jewish State» altogether. Carter's message was soft and gentle; so soft and compassionate that only an arrogant and power-intoxicated won't be able to live with it. Others (including me) were more hard and explicit, but then the others weren't the US presidents.

Why now? The apartheid in Palestine was bad enough ten years ago to warrant his intervention, but this despondent helplessness we witness now is a new phenomenon. Hope ever kept alive up by Camp David, by peace with Egypt, by Madrid and Oslo conferences is dead. A year of severe blockade brought forth a confrontation between the Palestinian parties and the Jewish wet dream, an inter-Palestinian civil war, is about to come. The Holy Land is on the verge of collapse. President Carter is 82, and he is not afraid of anything. In this age, and at this stage of life, statesmen are likely to speak their mind, like the Malaysian PM Mohammad Mahathir did after his retirement. This is the time for unpalatable truth: the ideological and spiritual guidance of the West while dislodged from the hands of the Church, passed over to the usurpers of Zion. While they rule, Palestine has no chance.

Though most ordinary US Jews are sane and sensible, the decisions are made by super-rich, super-powerful, super-chauvinist Jews who are anything but. They are the power pushing for war. Carter wanted to stop the disaster in the Middle East, by convincing the sane and rebutting the arrogant. Thus the President joined the fracas, as the traditional WASP America tries to regain the lost ground and save the country they love from destruction. The WASPs, with all their immense property holdings, traditions and roots found themselves marginalised by the Jews with their dead hold on media and universities: indeed the spirit rules over matter. Baker-Hamilon Iraq Study Group and Walt - Mearsheimer report are the first salvos in this WASP Intifada. A Jewish American columnist (resident in Israel and writing for Israel's Haaretz) Burston correctly stated that "Carter's true intended target was the organized American Jewish community." Carter pointed out the main reasons for apartheid in the Holy Land, says Burston:

* Jewish control of [the US] government: "It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine, to suggest that Israel comply with international law or to speak in defense of justice or human rights for Palestinians.»

* Jewish control of the [US] media: "What is even more difficult to comprehend is why the editorial pages of the major newspapers and magazines in the United States exercise similar self-restraint, quite contrary to private assessments expressed quite forcefully by their correspondents in the Holy Land."

After Carter spoke, he was immediately counterattacked by organised Jewry. This was not a sight to miss. In my native Siberia, in its short and furious summer you may see swarm of gnats attack a horse, each tiny bloodsucker eager for his piece of action. In a while, the blinded and infuriated animal rushes headlong in mad sprint and soon finds its death in the bottomless moors. The Jews developed the same style of attack. It is never a single voice arguing the case, but always a mass attack from left and right, below and above, until the attacked one is beaten and broken and crawls away in disgrace.

Each attacker is as tiny and irrelevant as a single gnat, but as swarm they are formidable. Observe them separately: Dershowitz, an advocate of torture and of hostage killing, an apprehended plagiarist who never was elected to any position of authority and commands no respect, demands to debate the president. It is indeed beyond chutzpah; but Dershowitz is supported by other Jews in prime positions and his ridiculous demand is seconded by university and media until this thieving nonentity gets equal time on a TV channel to present "his case". Another gnat is a Deborah Lipstadt, a nonentity brought forth by the Washington Post. Plenty of others are even smaller than these two, for instance 14 Jews who gave up their positions at Carter Center. If they would not keep media in their hands, they wouldn't be heard but by their spouses.

Their technique is quite simple. They switch the focus of argument onto the personality of their adversary. Thus, instead of discussing apartheid in Israel, we discuss Jimmy Carter, whether he is a bigot and antisemite (thus Foxman, a bad Jew) or he is not (Avnery, a good Jew). The correct answer is "irrelevant": Carter's love of Jews or lack of it has no bearing on the question of apartheid in Palestine. Likewise, if we discuss the situation in Bosnia or Kosovo, we do not go into our sentiments towards Serbs, Albanians or Croats. But Jews are different.

For instance, General Wesley Clark said that rich Jews, the great donors of Washington politicians, push for war with Iran. Well, it can be discussed, maybe denied, but instead, they derail the discussion into another topic, whether Clark is an antisemite. Matthew Yglesias provides the sources for the whole kosher hog, from comparison with The Protocols, to inevitable quote from Foxman who says Clark had "bought into conspiratorial bigotry". From this moment, Clark will stick to defending himself, and the guys will take care that his hands will be full. Here again, the correct answer is a polite shrug: who cares whether Clark is a bigot? Maybe he is also a paedophile and usurer, but this ad hominem has no bearing on what he said. And an accusation "you do not love Jews" is not much different from "You do not love your aunt", and you probably have learned to live with it at the age of six.

A good book to accustom oneself to this sort of attack is Michael Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita: this marvellous book shows a Jewish critics' swarm attack on a writer who dared to write about Christ. Indeed, whoever mentions Christ will experience it sooner or later.

I also tried the taste of swarm attack. During the Tsunami disaster in Thailand I discovered that the Jewish undertakers, Zaka, forced the Thais to delay mass burial of victims for a day or two, despite the real and immediate danger of epidemic diseases, in order to avoid a real calamity: holy Jewish bodies may be inadvertently buried together with the goyim. I was told so by the members of the Zaka team who were quite proud of their feat. I wrote about it (Tsunami in Gaza). It was republished by a few sites. Then, a British Jew named Manfred Ropschitz began an ad hominem campaign - against me. Other Jews joined the fray, discussing whether I am a Jew, or a "Swedish-Russian Nazi antisemite", as if it has any bearing on the tsunami story. Instead of shrugging it off, other supporters of Palestine switched to this piquant subject. They carried their discussion from The Times to their email lists, until eventually, another Jewish "antisionist" commented with deep satisfaction: "Shamir is marginalised and brought into disrepute".

Ropschitz did not try to disprove the story, for the story was true. He wrote: "With an army of journalists crawling over the Tsunami story I'd expect to have heard such shocking news by now - if it's true. I am a journalist and I don't believe it." No, gentlemen, you won't hear a true story if it is not acceptable to Ropschitzes of this world. They will hunt you to the far-away corner of the world, and there are not many people who care to risk their well-planned attack. Indeed one should be a real kamikaze to enter this fight. The Ropschitzes, these quite ordinary Jews who fully identify with their community, are the key to the swarm attack. There are many Jewish media-lords, even more editors, but it is the Ropschitzes that clinch the party line. These willing executioners of our freedom, the foot-soldiers of the media lords, automatically defend "the Jews" i.e. the organised Jewish community at any price. Ordinary human beings of Jewish origin can be of any opinion. Likewise, ordinary Americans do not decide whether their country will attack Iran or not. But Bush and Cheney alone can't fight Iraqi war, and the Jewish media lords would be powerless without their willing executioners of freedom.

The Gentile philosemites are even worse, noticed Eustace Mullins, the legendary American writer whose best-selling books (running into the millions) were never published or distributed by the mainstream. He wrote:

"It has long been common knowledge since the incorporation of the three [US] major national television networks that each of them was owned, operated and controlled by Jews. Now at last, or so it seemed, the Christians of America would have their own Christian television network on which they could observe the tenets of the Christian religion. Or so it seemed. And when the CBN began its daily broadcasting, what was its daily message? We must love the Jews. We must support the State of Israel in all its depredations and its immoral devastation of the Holy Christian Shrines in the Birthplace of Our Saviour. We must help the Jews, and we must, above all, avoid the greatest sin, the sin of 'anti-Semitism', whatever that is. Even the Jewish networks do not broadcast as blatantly pro-Jewish propaganda as the Christian Broadcasting Network."

A man died this week in France, a real saint, who was known by affectionate appellation "Abbè Pierre", a priest who fought with the Resistance, helped homeless, provided for the poor and was a great friend of Palestinians. In 1996 he was hounded almost to death after he expressed his support for another friend of Palestine, Roger Garaudy who wrote a book The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics. A victim of Jewish swarm attack, he went into seclusion to Italy and to Switzerland, deserted by the people he fought for. His sorry fate should be remembered by the French and bother their conscience. If the Maid of Orleans was executed by the British Occupation regime (though using French collaborationists) no such excuse is available for those who ostracised the Abbè Pierre: they just got frightened by the swarm attack.

This fear of Jewish swarm attacks already brought much sorrow to mankind. In 1930s, the famous American aviator Charles Lindbergh called the US to stay out of the coming war in Europe. He was attacked by the Jewish media as a Nazi and a Hitler sympathiser, was besmirched and "overnight Lindbergh went from cultural hero to moral pariah". Now again, the US is being pushed by the same forces into a new war, this time in the Middle East. Let us try and stop it by being fearless, for as a Jewish Hassid spiritual song hath it, "haikar lo lefahed bihlal", the most important is not to be afraid at all. Carter brought us hope that there is an America the world can live with, a non-aggressive, democratic America, whose policies aren't decided by the rich donors, but by the ordinary Americans who voted against the war, and who today gather in Washington calling to stop escalation.

A. Saccus a Signs of the Times contributor, continues his illumination of the principles of Ponerology with more real life examples.

Blue Ibis

*******************************************************

An Answer To The Israel Lobby - Ponerology

a. saccus
Signs Of The Times
Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:00 EST

The Associated Press published a story over the weekend on President Jimmy Carter's new book 'Peace, Not Apartheid':

Carter defends controversial book
AP
20/01/2007

Former President Jimmy Carter said Saturday that the storm of criticism he has faced for his recent book has not weakened his resolve for fair treatment of Israelis and Palestinians.

"I have been called a liar," Carter said at a town hall meeting on the second day of a three-day symposium on his presidency at the University of Georgia.

"I have been called an anti-Semite," he said. "I have been called a bigot. I have been called a plagiarist. I have been called a coward. Those kind of accusations, they concern me, but they don't detract from the fact the book is accurate and is needed."...

"Not one of the critics of my book has contradicted any of the basic premises ... that is the horrible persecution and oppression of the Palestinian people and secondly that the formula for finding peace in the Middle East already exists," the 82-year-old Carter said.

A President of the United States an anti-Semite?

The unquestionably and most eminently Christian Jimmy Carter a "liar" and "bigot"? What's going on here?

Alexander Cockburn of Counterpunch commented on the slander and libel against Carter and his book in an article entitled 'First bomb Carter, then nuke Iran':

But the assault on Carter is all to no avail. With each gust of abuse, Carter's book soars higher and higher on the bestseller lists, reaching number 4 on Amazon itself. This doesn't prove the lobby has no power. It proves the lobby can be dumb....

The Israel lobby may be many things, but it is not 'dumb'. We are dealing with something much more alarming here:

A.M. Lobaczewski, in his seminal book "Political Ponerology" commented thusly:

Paranoid Character Disorders:

...arguments begin to undermine their overvalued ideas, crush their long-held stereotypes of reasoning, or forces them to accept a conclusion they had subconsciously rejected before. Such a stimulus unleashes...a torrent of pseudo-logical, largely paramoralistic, often insulting utterances which always contain some degree of suggestion. (p.110)

Look at the response from the Israel lobby to Carter's book; could there be a better description than: "a torrent of pseudo-logical, largely paramoralistic, often insulting utterances which always contain some degree of suggestion"?

This soon to be commonplace concept, "paramoralism", is so pivotal for understanding the triumphs and tragedies being enacted on the world stage today, that it merits a closer look.

Lobaczewski continues:

...Unfortunately, it has become a frequent phenomenon for...oppressive groups, or patho-political systems to invent ever-new moral criteria ("paramoralisms") ... Paramoralisms somehow cunningly evade the control of our common sense, sometimes leading to acceptance or approval of behavior that is openly pathological. ... Paramoralisitic statements and suggestions so often accompany various kinds of evil that they seem quite irreplaceable. Anything which threatens autocratic rule becomes (is labelled) deeply immoral. (pps 150, 205)

Examples of this tactic abound in modern politics, particularly in relation to the US and Israel, for example: "You are with us, or you are against us", being "against us" meaning that "you are a terrorist" and thus, immoral."

Now you know what to call such psychobabble: 'Paramoralisms'.

Cockburn continued:

The Israel lobby retains its grip inside the Beltway, but it's starting to lose its hold on the broader public debate. Why?

Lobaczewski, in "Political Ponerology", answers this question:

... time and experience confirm what a psychologist may have long foreseen: the entire effort "the goal - forcing human minds to incorporate pathological experiential methods and thought-patterns, and consequently accepting such rule - only results in producing a general stifling of intellectual developments and deep-rooted protest against affront-mongering "hypocrisy". The authors and executors of this program are incapable of understanding that the decisive factor making their work difficult is the fundamental nature of normal human beings - the majority. (p.195-6)

Cockburn continues:

You can't brutalize the Palestinian people in the full light of day, decade after decade, without claims that Israel is a light among the nations getting more than a few serious dents....

Himself a victim of both the Nazi and Soviet occupations of Poland, Prof. Lobaczewski not only lived through these horrors, but used them to forge the most penetrating analysis of the psychological and social mechanisms behind these evil chapters of recent history that I have ever read. I count this as the most important book I have ever read. His concepts hold the key to our future, if we will but grasp it.

Lobaczewski speaks of the life cycle of such episodes of societal "ponerization" or "evilizing" and their inevitable outcome:

Lobaczewski, in "Political Ponerology":

The achievement of absolute domination by pathocrats in the government of a country cannot be permanent since large sectors of the society become disaffected by such rule and eventually find some way of toppling it. This is part of the historical cycle, easily discerned when history is read from a Ponerological point of view. Pathocracy at the summit of governmental organization also does not constitute the entire picture of the "mature phenomenon". Such a system of government has nowhere to go but down.

Political Ponerology - The Scientific Study of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes -Andrew M. Lobaczewski