Don’t blame the inmates of the lunatic asylum

Some Israeli and other Jewish opponents of Zionism’s colonial enterprise have described Israel as a “fascist” state. I think the more appropriate terminology is lunatic asylum. But I don’t blame the inmates (the Jewish citizens of the state) for what’s happening. They are as much the products of Zionist brainwashing as are the supporters of Israel right or wrong throughout the mainly Gentile Judeo-Christian world. I blame the wardens and management of the asylum (Israel’s military and political leaders)

Israel’s leaders still believe that by means of brute force and reducing them to abject poverty, they can break the will of the Palestinians to continue their struggle for their rights. The assumption being that, at a point, and out of total despair, the Palestinians will be prepared to accept crumbs from Zionism’s table in the shape of two or three bantustans, or, better still, will abandon their homeland and seek a new life in other countries. In my view the conviction that Zionism will one day succeed in breaking the Palestinian will to continue the struggle for an acceptable minimum of justice is the product of minds which are deluded to the point of clinical madness.

There is, however, one solid piece of evidence that a majority of Israeli Jews are not as mad as their leaders. It’s in the fact that 64% of them have said their government must hold direct talks with Hamas. Less than one-third, 28%, opposes such talks. (Those were the findings of a Ha’aretz-Dialog poll. It was was conducted, under the supervision of Professor Camil Fuchs of Tel Aviv University, before Israel’s escalation of its confrontation with Hamas in Gaza; and it could be, because of the international condemnation of Israel’s massively disproportionate action of the past few days, that even more than 64% now favour direct talks with Hamas).

That’s on the one hand. On the other is the fact that Hamas has long been calling for a ceasefire or truce, which, it has indicated, could be extended indefinitely. The problem is that Hamas’s leaders are insisting – they would be as mad as Israel’s leaders if they were not – that a ceasefire must be a two-way street. And that means Israel would have to end its incursions of Gazaand abandon its policy of targeted assassinations.

Israel’s leaders are not going to do that. Their present strategy for Gazais to make life hell for all of its people in the hope that they will abandon Hamas. And when that doesn’t happen? Israel will seek to annihiliate Hamas. I mean competely, not bit by bit.

Question: When is a war crime not a war crime?

Answer: When the perpetrator is the Zionist state of Israel.

2 comments on this post.
  1. Dr Chris Edwards:

    Well said, Alan.

    I see that Elliott Abrams (of Iran-Contra fame), Dubya and Rice are in the shit again over their abortive attempts to foment civil war in Gaza via Fatah honcho Dahlan. Iran-Contra 2.0 cum Bay of Pigs?

    Leaked papers expose the murky details in Vanity Fair:

    “Vanity Fair has obtained confidential documents, since corroborated by sources in the U.S. and Palestine, which lay bare a covert initiative, approved by Bush and implemented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams, to provoke a Palestinian civil war. The plan was for forces led by Dahlan, and armed with new weapons supplied at America’s behest, to give Fatah the muscle it needed to remove the democratically elected Hamas-led government from power. (The State Department declined to comment.)”

    Full story at:

    http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804

    And all the while, Bush talks the disengenous talk about the need for peace and a Palestinian state!

    What a sorry bunch of mendacious, hypocritical
    bunglers they are! Even former Cheney aide, and MEMRI founder, Wurmser is bad mouthing them:

    “Wurmser accuses the Bush administration of “engaging in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory.” He believes that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand. “It looks to me that what happened wasn’t so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen,” Wurmser says.”

    There is no hope for these people. they are hopelessly bankrupt and bonkers.

    Seamus Milne has a good article in today’s Guardian too.

  2. Dr Chris Edwards:

    Neither the Independent nor the the Guardian reports of the Jerusalem massacre today even discuss the possibility of a false flag operation by the Zionists. In the effect of the massacre is to distract attention away from the damaging Vanity Fair revelations. And it creates the perfect climate for unleashing a “shoah” on Gaza–as proposed by the Israeli Minister a week before the Jerusalem massacre.

    Ian Black in the Guardian today writes:

    “The most intriguing reaction came from Lebanon where al-Manar, Hizbullah’s TV station, reported that responsibility for the attack had been claimed by a previously unknown group called The Galilee Freedom Battalions – Groups of the Martyr Imad Mughniyeh and Martyrs of Gaza. The name suggests a tendency that Middle East analysts point to: Hizbullah and Hamas, both backed by Iran and Syria, see themselves as allies who coordinate their actions.

    Mughniyeh, a Hizbullah commander seen as master terrorist by the US and Israel, was assassinated in a mysterious car bombing in Damascus last month. No one claimed responsibility but Israel was widely blamed.

    Hassan Nasrallah, Hizbullah’s leader, pledged at the funeral that Mughniyeh would be avenged. Last night may have been his response.”

    Full story:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/07/israelandthepalestinians1

    Particularly significant is the fact that no one has claimed responsibility. There is only a reference to the “previously unknown group” on the Hezbollah TV station–which certainly fits the pattern of a false flag black op by the Zionists.

    No one can prove this of course, but it is the failure of the “liberal” press to even consider it as a possibility that is significant.

Leave a comment