Once in a long while, some things occur which register on the moral radar of anyone who doesn’t live under the metaphorical rock. When an occupied territory is placed under a virtual starvation embargo (1) for the crime of voting for the “wrong” people in a free and open election, and repeatedly attacked with force that isn’t so much disproportionate as so much out of proportion that one would compare it to shooting a howitzer at a mosquito (12), one might think that it would be one of those occasions.
But one might be wrong.
Then, when an international aid flotilla sets sail to deliver a purely symbolic amount of aid, which was carefully vetted before leaving harbour to ensure that it contained only humanitarian materials such as food, toys and wheelchairs, and is attacked by heavily armed commandos rappelling from helicopters, leaving nine aid workers dead (many of them having been shot multiple times), one might think it would be one of those occasions. (3)
Then again, one might be wrong.
If one disregards both the shrill and increasingly hysterical propaganda – virtually all of it too ludicrous for anyone to take seriously for a moment – emerging from the government and “defence” forces of the so-called state of “Israel”, and its supporters in Washington and elsewhere, and the voices of moral outrage from – presumably – more intelligent people, then one is left with the plaintive question of the uninformed: “How could Israel do this? Don’t they care for world opinion any longer?”
A simple answer to that question would be “No.” But in this case, while the simple answer is undoubtedly correct in its own way, it’s just the tip of a much larger iceberg.
The fact, however unpleasant, is this: “Israel” is a Nazi state, and its current crimes are no more than the unmasking of the Nazism that is inherent in its structure.
Before I go on, let me introduce a personal note:
I belong to a family that has traditionally been extremely pro-Zionazi. I believe, in fact, that I’m the first member of the extended family to openly declare my animosity to Zionazism and all it stands for and my opposition to the so-called state of “Israel”.
I grew up listening to the mythology of heroic “Israel”, fighting off evil Arab (read “Muslim”; and the word “Muslim” in India, when used by non-Muslims, can almost automatically be taken to mean “evil”) enemies, struggling for its very existence. Those were, fortunately enough, the days when India had a comparatively principled foreign policy (instead of an American policy as it now has) and the newspapers felt free to print anti-Zionazi comment.
Thus it was, in 1982, while I was listening to my dad assuring me that Syria was the villain who was to blame for the “Israeli” invasion of Lebanon, I could, at the exact same moment, be looking at a cartoon of Zionazi prime minister Menachem Begin sitting on a pyramid of skulls and gnawing on a bone while a city (Beirut) burned in the background. So pervasive, in fact, was my family’s pro-Zionazi propaganda that it couldn’t but have made me think that perhaps there was another side to the story. So I did a little research; and even then, back in the days long before the Internet, there was more than enough information to feed my need.
I simply couldn’t see, you know, how anyone could dispossess a people at gunpoint, force them into refugee camps, and declare that they had divine sanction for these crimes, and then go on to claim that they were only defending themselves when they invaded and murdered thousands of unarmed civilians and occupied even more territory. Somehow, it seemed to me that this was akin to a bank robber who sits on top of his pile of ill-gotten wealth, shoots all comers, and declares that he’s acting only in self-defence.
Before I was much older and wiser, I saw a larger parallel: the imperialist powers of the nineteenth century, occupying other peoples’ lands and then declaring that they had a “civilising mission” to do so, and more –
I saw a parallel with Nazi Germany and its search of Lebensraum in the East of Europe, where the native populace would be reduced to the positions of drawers of water and hewers of wood for the Aryan overlords. It’s by no means a far-fetched comparison: the early Zionists declared Palestine to be Lebensraum just as surely as Hitler would do Russia less than half a century later.
It seems to me, therefore, that my teenage reasoning is more than being borne out by these happenings of recent days.
If we are to compare Zionism with Nazism, obviously, we should be aware what Nazism is, and how Zionism measures up.
One of the cardinal features of Nazism is its extreme racism and its contempt for other peoples. For the Nazis the Slavic people of Eastern Europe, Russians and Poles and Ukrainians, were Untermenschen, “subhumans”, who existed only to serve the Nazi superman as slave labour. For the Zionazi, the Arabs are vermin (17) who deserve nothing except exile or extermination, who, in fact, are not human, but a species so far inferior that they have no rights at all (19). Laws are regularly passed (21) in the self-styled Zionazi Parliament, the Knesset, allowing official discrimination (22) against Arab “Israeli” citizens. And never forget that the Zionazi pseudostate was the one of the closest allies of the apartheid regime in South Africa (18).
Another of the cardinal features of Nazism is its reliance on unproven mythology as a basis for its claims. For the Nazi, the “Aryan”, specifically, Teuton, was a superior race, one responsible for virtually every advance that the human race had ever undertaken, and thus entitled to its rights as a Master Race irrespective of competing claims from other peoples. For the Zionazis, “Israel” was the Promised Land given to their ancestors by YHWH and therefore they, as the Chosen People, have overriding rights to it, no matter that millions of other human beings have been living there for millennia. In both cases, you see, the question isn’t open for discussion; it’s so because the Nazis/Zionazis say it’s so. Even if reputable Orthodox Jewish rabbis say (16) that the Zionazi pseudostate is directly against the precepts of the Jewish religion, what the Zionazi pseudostate says is true simplybecause the Zionazi pseudostate says it’s so.
A third feature of Nazism has always been its extreme militarism. The Nazis positively worshipped the military; while Hitler had a personal contempt for the officer caste, he, and the Nazis in general, fell over themselves building up the military forces and putting every possible man in uniform. What this meant was that these forces became utterly useless unless utilised in war, and war became even more inevitable than it already was. The Zionazi pseudostate, even before its inception, has never been more than a military state, one built round its defence forces (20), where every citizen is first a soldier and then a reservist; and even a cursory examination of its history will reveal that since the 1950s, it has always instigated and started wars, up to and including the present day (not excepting the war of 1973 which was caused by its occupation of Egyptian and Syrian territory).
Fourthly, Nazism has been known for its capitalism-friendly nature. The Nazis claimed to be socialists (the word “Nazi” is a contraction of the German for “National Socialist”, and the full name of the party wasNational Sozialistiche Deutsche Arbeiters Partei, National Socialist German Workers’ Party) but once in power crushed trade unions, imprisoned anyone of the slightest leftist pretension, and supplied slave labour to such industrial concerns as Krupp and BMW. The Zionazi pseudostate was initially set up by leftists thinking of building an egalitarian society, but has always (despite socialist pretences) been extremely capitalism friendly (14), one reason for the West’s backing it to the hilt against such socialist regimes as Gamel Abdel Nasser’s Egypt, which was invaded in 1956 for the crime of nationalising the Suez Canal.
All right wing movements, Nazism most of all, have been characterised by a relatively small group arrogating to itself the right to speak for the people as a whole, and calling anyone who thinks otherwise a traitor. The Nazis spoke for all “Teutonic” people, and Hitler actually made plans to deport the entire Dutch nation as punishment for opposing the plans of their fellow Nordic supermen. The Zionazi pseudostate claims to speak for all Jews, everywhere, even though only a tiny fraction of them live in Occupied Palestine and there are many, many of them who despise, detest and abhor the crimes of Zionazism (15).
Then again, Nazism was initially shy about its aggressive military practices, lying repeatedly when required. When it invaded Poland in September 1939, it was the Poles who had allegedly attacked a German radio station in Silesia, and bodies of concentration camp inmates dressed in Polish uniforms were left as “proof” of the attack (surely a rather preposterously slim grounds on which to go to war). As the war went on, though, such delicacy was abandoned in favour of naked aggression, until towards the end when suddenly the Nazis – about to be overwhelmed by the Red hordes from the east – discovered that they were fighting in defence of “Western civilisation”. The Zionazis have long since quietly abandoned the pretext that they have been fighting for self-preservation as a nation state, but still provide pro-forma justifications (6) for their aggressive military actions, excuses as transparently fake (9) as those of the Nazis in Poland. And, whenever pressed hard by inconvenient facts, they have fallen back on the claim that they are the “lone bastion of freedom in the Middle East (sic).”
Just as Nazism used terror to subdue subject peoples - open, mass-punishment terror - the Zionazi pseudostate has never tried to pretend that it uses anything but terror as a tool. Here's a quote from a Zionazi commander (12):
As Israel's most prominent military analyst, Zeev Schiff, summarized his remarks, "the Israeli Army has always struck civilian populations, purposely and consciously...the Army, he said, has never distinguished civilian [from military] targets...[but] purposely attacked civilian targets." The reasons were explained by the distinguished statesman Abba Eban: "there was a rational prospect, ultimately fulfilled, that affected populations would exert pressure for the cessation of hostilities."
One shouldn’t forget that both Nazism and Zionazism are remarkably intolerant towards dissent. The Zionazi pseudostate hasn’t yet gone to the extent of imprisoning dissenters in concentration camps, like the Nazis did, but it doesn’t have to; it can call dissenters traitors (13). Also, it’s got the world’s largest open-air de facto concentration camp/ghetto (1) lying right under its guns in Gaza, and Arabs who have the misfortune to fall afoul of the regime can simply be threatened with loss of citizenship and deported or pushed into that territory. And while “Israeli” peace activists are today isolated and nearly helpless (10), international peace activists like Noam Chomsky (a Jew himself, remember) are no longer welcome (11).
No description of the features of Nazism could ever be complete without its celebration of violence. Nazism was all about violence; violence came to be, virtually, the national religion, war its only real ideology. The Nazi revelled in violence simply because he could inflict it, and planned the inflicting of that violence in the minutest detail. The Zionazi loves violence (4), he rejoices in it, and even more so when the opponent cannot fight back in any way worth calling a fight. This is why Zionazis are filling the streets of the cities of Occupied Palestine (7) exulting in the massacre of aid workers and believing, or pretending to believe, the explanation that fighting back against an armed boarding mission with sticks and bottles (9) deserved lethal force including people being shot multiple times in the head and chest. This is why the Gaza Massacre of 2008 even happened (12).
There are, it seems to me, enough parallels between Zionism and Nazism to be getting on with.
Therefore, once we come back to the question asked by so many, “Doesn’t Israel care for world opinion any longer?” the answer isn’t just “no”, but the answer is that “Israel” can’t care for world opinion. It’s not in the nature of the Nazi beast.
Something that has to be clearly understood if one is to understand Zionism is the attitude of the United States of America. I don’t think it’s an exaggeration in any way to say that for the Zionazi, all that matters so far as the outside world is concerned is the USA. None of crimes of the Zionazi pseudostate would even have been contemplated but for the unswerving and often arguably treasonous support of successive US governments, right from the sinking of the USS Liberty (23) in 1967 to the murder of a US citizen in the Aid Flotilla, shot four times in the head by the heroic Zionazi commandos fighting in self-defence (5). This includes the widespread suspicion (8) that the terrorist attack of 11 September 2001 (if indeed it was a terrorist attack) was known in advance to Zionazi spies and allowed to happen in order to radicalise American opinion against Arabs.
The myth of Heroic “Israel” is primarily an American-invented and American-fostered myth, still sedulously propagated by Zionazi lobbies in the US and by mainstream American media. It takes a special, almost uniquely American, gall to claim that Zionazis who bomb and starve (12) over a million and a half Palestinians are doing so in self-defence, but that any Palestinian who fights back against a society where every adult is either a soldier or a reservist is a “terrorist”; even more gall to ignore illegal Zionazi settlements on Palestinian territory (said settlements being illegal under international law even if you pretend that the Zionazi pseudostate is legitimate) but claim the Palestinians deserve what happened to them because they voted, in a US-supervised election, for the “wrong people” (HAMAS). Today, the US is more than bending over backwards to protect the Zionazi pseudostate over its crimes against the aid ships, and if tomorrow it invades Iran, it will do so for one real reason, and one reason only: because the Zionazi pseudostate wants it to.
The US, then, has always supported the pseudostate by any and all means possible, up to and including its own detriment, and the pseudostate virtually survives on billions of US dollars in subsidies and “aid”. Looked at from that angle, suddenly, in fact, the allegedly inexplicable US support to the Zionazi regime suddenly becomes explicable; it’s not the support of an ally, but that of a colonial overlord for a colony across the sea. And if the Zionazi pseudostate is an American colony, it can only be for one reason: to maintain an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” in West Asia, a base from which to intervene and control events. It becomes even more obvious when one notes that up to 1967, when there were many compliantly servile Arab regimes in the neighbourhood, the US was relatively even-handed in West Asia (back then Britain and France were the pseudostate’s chief backers). But after several of these servile regimes gave way to less controllable governments, suddenly the US discovered that “Israel” was a beacon of democracy and needed help and support.
Is it really necessary to point out the United State’s actual attitude towards real democratic governments worldwide that refuse to toe its line?
This fact, then, must be remembered: that the Zionazi pseudostate exists on American approbation.
So, moving on, what can we say about the future of Zionazism, which is (if you haven’t forgotten) the raison d’être of this article?
I believe that Zionazism’s future basically hinges on a few discernible factors.
1. First and foremost is the US support I just mentioned. Now, while the US support has so far been blatant (6) and officially unwavering, there’s evidence that it might not last forever (2). The Zionazi propaganda campaign in the US seems to have reached the point of diminishing returns, with approval ratings for the Zionazi pseudostate decreasing significantly. That in itself might not be sufficient, because the two political parties in America both depend on Zionazi funding, but there are a few other factors in play.
(a) The weakening of US power. The United States is an empire in decline, and the more it tries to spread itself over the globe and control everything, the more significantly its resources will be stretched to breaking point. The economic crash of 2008-09 is only the first stage of a long term breakdown of international economic arrangements as resources grow scarcer and the “new economy” shows just what it’s built of: hot air.
Therefore, the time will come when the US will find it impossible to militarily do “Israel’s” bidding and at the same time stave off the threats to its other far flung outposts of empire, threats which exist precisely because it has placed those outposts of empire. It will either have to choose between abandoning “Israel” or its empire; it will not be able to hold on to both.
Simultaneously or otherwise, the economic downturn of the US will mean that it cannot go on funding the Zionazi regime in the style to which the latter has become accustomed. Sooner or later the US will have to choose between beggaring itself or stopping funding the Zionazis.
In both instances, what this means is that the Zionazis will either find themselves abandoned militarily and financially, or else the US will continue to support them militarily and financially until it, unable to bear the burden (there’s always a last straw to break the camel’s back), collapses; at which point, in any case, the Zionazis will find themselves abandoned militarily and financially.
(b) The self-defeating nature of recent Zionazi crimes. There comes a point where, no matter how much spin you put on something, the truth is so blatantly self-evident that it becomes impossible to ignore. The Zionazis have certainly arrived perilously close to that point with the attack on the aid flotilla; no amount of lies will obscure what it was, a vicious and piratical attack. Constantly protecting and cosseting a criminal makes you an accessory to his crimes, as the US is beginning uneasily to be aware. Even Zionazism’s old friends, the British, have abandoned them now; Zionazism has – in truth – lost Europe.
There are indications that even the Zionazis are beginning to realise this; the head of the Zionazi murder organisation called Mossad recently stated (24) that “Israel is becoming a liability to the US.”
(c) The fact that the US needs “Israel” less than before. No longer does the US need the “unsinkable aircraft carrier” in West Asia; it’s back in control of Iraq, bleeding insurgency notwithstanding, and has no intention of ever leaving, promises to the contrary. It virtually occupies Kuwait. The Jordanian and Saudi monarchies wouldn’t last long unless supported by the US, and are aware of it, as are the vile dictatorships of Yemen and Egypt. “Israel’s” market value would seem to have degraded significantly, and even it must know it.
(d) The end of Arab oil. Let’s get this straight: the need for the unsinkable carrier in West Asia was all about oil, and the access to oil. The attitude of the West towards Arab oil has always been that it belonged to the West, and was theirs to exploit; it just happened, inconveniently, to be located under the sands of the West Asian desert.
But someday, inevitably, that oil will run out.
Once that happens, what do you think will be the response of the Americans? Will they still think it worthwhile to maintain their colonial base? Logic says no.
So, point number one: the American lifeline won’t last forever.
2. The higher demographic growth of the Arab populace. There’s no way the Zionazis will ever outbreed the Arabs, and sooner or later the pseudostate will be forced to contemplate the fact that there’s no way to further squeeze the Palestinians into the ever shrinking areas the pseudostate is willing to allow them to live out their miserable lives. Then, one of two things will happen: the Zionazis will either have to begin on a programme of mass deportation, genocide, and blatant ethnic cleansing, all of which will simply hasten the complete collapse of international support, including the vital American one; or else they will be compelled to allow in those people into the pure and unsullied land of “Israel” and convert it into a multireligious state, where Jews and Arabs can live as equals. Either will be the end of Zionazism as we know it today.
3. The increasingly racist/fascist character of the “Israeli” society, and the infiltration of aggressively fundamentalist religion into all facets of it. Far from being a beacon of hope and enlightenment in the benighted Arab lands, the Zionazi pseudostate is fast becoming a belligerent and chauvinistic regional bully, which claims now that Jews are genetically superior to Arabs (2,25), yet another Nazi trait. This is important because it will be this characteristic, more than all the others, that will make it impossible to step back from the brink of disaster.
4. The waning excuse of the Holocaust. As everyone knows, the standard excuse for “Israel’s” crimes against humanity is the genocide perpetrated by the Nazis just under seventy years ago on, among others, the Jews of Europe. Even though the Zionazi enterprise for setting up a Jewish state in Palestine long predated the Nazis (it can be dated to the Balfour Declaration of 1917, in fact) the excuse has always been that the Zionazi pseudostate in particular, and Jews in general, have a right to defend themselves against a new Holocaust.
It was never much of an excuse, and now it’s waning remarkably thin.
One of the biggest problems is that even the Holocaust has a shelf life, and now – getting on for seven decades since it ended – its impact is dissipating, especially when compared with the much more recent crimes of the Zionazi pseudostate, crimes that are played out on TV, and everything. Refusing to allow discussion on the Holocaust is no solution, because all it has done is give ammunition to those who think it was a lie.
Also, not even a logically challenged person can really believe the contention that “Israel” has to defend its existence anymore; not with its hundreds of nuclear weapons, its massive military forces, and its assured US support. What the Arabs didn’t do in 1948 they aren’t going to do now, and most of all not when half of their rulers depend on the US to survive.
Still less is it even conceivable that HAMAS or any other coalition of Palestinians will set up concentration camps complete with gas chambers and Zyklon B to exterminate world Jewry; in fact this is so ridiculous that not even the Zionazis have propounded this theory.
Therefore, with the knowledge of what the Zionazi society is, and what factors will influence it in the coming years, I believe that we can form some ideas of the eventual shape of Zionazism’s downfall.
First and foremost, one can not, now or in the foreseeable future, depend on the Zionazi populace suddenly developing good sense or empathy with those they oppress or destroy. They are on the fast track to open Nazism, and the fact is that when an extreme right wing government like Netanyahu’s comes to power by popular acclaim, any challenge to it will almost certainly come from even further to the right.
"Land for peace" was always a chimera, because the Zionazi pseudostate actually claims even more land than it currently occupies, a so-called "Greater Israel"(27) , and the rabid rabbis who now rule the Zionazi military have refused to part with even a millimetre of land.
As for future generations, I have little hope for a change of attitude since Zionazi children are systematically taught (26) from childhood to hate Arabs, just as the Hitler Youth were taught systematically to hate Jews.
Therefore, given time, we can safely predict a Zionazi regime so right wing that it will rival the Zealots of history.
Now, what does such a regime do when faced with the collapse of support from its main sponsor, and just about total international isolation? What does it do when faced with its own imminent demise?
You got it: war, war, and more war.
Therefore, when the time comes (and it will probably not be as far off in the future as most people think), expect massive aggression by the Zionazi pseudostate against all its neighbours, friendly or otherwise, in an effort to destroy as much as possible, and try to impose some kind of peace at gunpoint on the civilised world; or, if all fails, to take down as many of the hated Other as possible as it goes under. Mass use of nuclear weapons certainly can’t be ruled out.
How can I say this? I can say this because the Zionazis have modelled themselves so closely on the Nazis that the psychology ofGotterdämmerung will be in operation as completely as it was on Hitler’s minions.
Of course I may be wrong, and perhaps the Zionazi pseudostate will step back from the brink, accept the rights of the Palestinians, and properly compensate them for its sins.
But, given the naked face of Zionist Nazism, I don’t think so.
17. http://www.counterpunch.org/dasgupta07292006.html (A word about this link; it mentions Begin and another Zionazi commenting about Palestinians and calling them two-legged beasts and roaches, which undoubtedly occurred, though pro-Zionazi websites claim the context was mistaken; but it also mentions the Zionazi ambassador to Burma saying the Arabs weren’t human beings, which I haven’t seen any Zionazi site deny. Either way it proves Zionazi racism.)