Are These People Chosen by God?

Israeli right-wing activists attacking Palestinian freelance journalist Saif Kwasmi

On Wednesday June 5th, during what is known as the Jerusalem Day Flag March, thousands of ultra nationalist Israel’s rampaged through occupied East Jerusalem. Chanting “Death to Arabs” and “May their villages burn”, they smashed up shops and businesses, attacking and injuring dozens of Palestinians. An Australian journalist was also attacked and intimidated by the far right marchers. The Israeli police, themselves in violation of international law simply through their presence in East Jerusalem, stood by and did nothing to stop them.

Australian journalist attacked amid violence at Israel’s Jerusalem Day march | ABC News
Palestinian journalist assaulted by Israeli settlers speaks to TRT World

The image above is, in the words of a Haaretz editorial, “photographic documentation of the ugly, violent demonstrators during Wednesday’s parade of Jewish supremacy through the streets of Jerusalem”. Though such an image cannot in anyway compare to those documenting the horror of the genocide being carried out in Gaza, it does raise a profound question: who are these people?

They are of course ultra-nationalist Zionist Jews, specifically Kahanists – followers of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, a notorious Arab hater who advocated violence against Palestinians and ethnic cleansing through forced transfer to neighbouring Arab countries. What might be shocking, however, is that few of them would deny or even object to being described in this way. Like Kahane, they are open about their beliefs and intentions, and indeed, as the images show, unafraid to openly act on them. What gives them the confidence to act this way, and how do they justify their violence?

As far as confidence, this is plainly obvious. They can act like this because they know no one will stop them. It is not only they who want rid of Palestinians from Palestine. Ever since Israel was imposed on the region in 1948, the Israeli establishment and an overwhelming majority of Israel’s citizens have wished the same. These fellows who we see beating and kicking a Palestinian are just the honest face of Zionism, doing the necessary work that everyone else knows must be done if they are to obtain a state purified of the natives.

Regarding their justifications for what most of us see as racial, supremacist violence, this too is simple to understand. They claim to be God’s chosen people, who also gave them the land. If you push a little and ask why would God choose them and why would he give them the land, their answer, which you will find in many a YouTube video, is that God chose them to be “a light unto the nations”. As for the territory, that simply goes with the job of being chosen.

Ultimately, then, these people do not justify their actions in terms of what they want. When it comes to justification, they pass the buck, claiming it is what God wants. This makes the racism and violence more palatable for some people to swallow, and much more difficult to oppose for those who who see it for what it is, including many secular and anti-Zionist Jews.

Caution however. It is not just these violent exponents of Zionism who maintain the claim of a God given right to the land, as well as sanctification by God of the violence required to obtain it. As a 2018 Haaretz poll uncovered, it is a general claim made by a majority of Israelis that they are chosen by God and favored in this way.

I shall not contest that claim. After all, who am I to question God’s preferences? What is of more interest is what this claim says about God.

The chilling implication is quite clear: if this is the treatment we might expect from His chosen carrying out His will, what might we expect from Him?

Those who know the Bible will know the countless examples of what God supposedly does to those who oppose Him. As Chomsky famously observed, the god of the Bible is an unrelenting “homicidal maniac”.

This then is Israel in its barest and most honest manifestation. It is a country built on a belief in the divinely sanctioned supremacy of one people over another, together with the divinely sanctioned violence of obtaining the goal of an ethnically cleansed land. That is exactly what we see in graphic detail in the images above.

Of course, the alternative to this belief is that the claim to divine right and favour is just a myth. What we see before us is not the manifestation of God’s will, but exactly what it looks like: racist, hate-filled violence of a settler colonial ideology that exploits an otherwise harmless ancient myth.

Within Judaism and among Jews prior to the rise of Zionism, the belief was indeed a benign myth, lacking any real world effects. Religious Jews may have believed they are the chosen people awaiting the Messiah, who will reconcile them again to God, but that is as far as it went. And in that, as for all of us, they are entitled to believe what they like.

The problem arose when Zionism reared its head, appropriating a central belief of Judaism and exploiting it for political purposes. As Gideon Levy notes in Haaretz: “Whereas belief in God is a private matter, the belief in a chosen people provides the outlines of policy that explains a great deal about Israel’s actions.” A private belief if not acted upon is benign, no matter what that belief is. Which comes under the general banner “as long as you keep your religion to yourself and your group, no harm done”. And such was the case for Judaism before the rise of Zionism.

With the advent of Zionism and its colonial ambitions in Palestine, the belief in a chosen people became instrumental to that colonisation. Down to this day, not only does it “inform the policy outlines of Israel” as Levy notes, it fuels and lends cover to those in Israel unafraid to openly use violence, with the aim of making the lives of Palestinians unbearable in the hope they will leave. Invoking God’s is seen as a thin veneer by many of us, but it is sufficiently thick as to provide the cover for most political purposes, particularly among a public – mainly in the West – already conditioned through Christianity to view the myth as God’s true word.

Returning finally to the violent parade of Jewish supremacy, we see who these people really are. Through Zionism, they have taken an otherwise benign, private belief of an ancient religion and turned it into an instrument that can justify violence, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.

Can these people be freed from the supremacist clutches of Zionism and redeemed?

That is another matter. First, they must be stopped.

Israel’s Claim to Having the Most Moral Army Does Not Stand Up to Moral Scrutiny

Aside from the inherent subjectivity and potential bias in self-declared moral superiority, there are also very sound philosophical grounds for rejecting any such claim.

[Note: Since writing, the number of Palestinian civilians massacred during the freeing of 4 Israeli captives rose from 100 to 274. Sadly, this makes the arguments below even more pertinent and robust.]

I formulated the following reductio ad absurdum and asked ChatGPT to assess it for logical consistency. Below is an edited version of the interaction. The full, unedited dialogue with ChatGPT is here.

Recently 4 Israelis being held by Hamas were freed by the Israeli army. This came with the loss of more than 100 Palestinian civilians, and injury of hundreds more. Based on this, the following reductio ad absurdum can be formulated:

  1. Israel is the most moral army in the world
  2. Morality consists in avoiding or minimising harm, including death and injury
  3. A moral army would seek to minimise deaths and injuries (From 2)
  4. The identity of those spared death and injury is irrelevant to moral considerations
  5. Therefore Israel is neither the most, nor a moral army.

ChatGPT assessed the reductio and responded:

"If we accept all premises as true, the conclusion logically follows that Israel, by causing significant harm to Palestinian civilians in the process of freeing its own hostages, cannot be considered the most moral army according to the principles stated. This is because causing over 100 civilian deaths and numerous injuries contradicts the notion of minimizing harm, thereby challenging the initial claim of being the most moral army.
The reductio ad absurdum argument effectively shows a contradiction between the claim of being the most moral army and the observed actions that resulted in significant harm. Therefore, the argument is logically consistent, provided the premises are accepted as true."

However, it did note a caveat in that “the argument’s logical consistency hinges on the acceptance of the premises. (See the full dialogue with ChatGPT here).

So then I asked it to examine the premises in which moral claims are made (specifically 2 and 4) through the lens of prevailing moral theories. Premises 1 and 3 do not require such scrutiny, since 1 is a subjective claim by Israel, and 3 follows from 2, which is under scrutiny anyway.

I asked:
With reference to the most widely agreed upon moral theories, assess if the central premises (2 and 4) stand up to scrutiny when examined through these moral theories.

It examined the central premises “through the lens of the most widely agreed upon moral theories: utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, and relativism”, and concluded:

Overall, while both premises find significant support in major moral theories, Premise 4 is less universally accepted due to the moral relevance of relationships and specific contexts.

Essentially, it noted that most if not all moral theories do “recognize the moral relevance of relationships and context, which may challenge the idea that the identity of those spared is completely irrelevant” (thus undermining premise 4).

ChatGPT has a point, and though it may have been a worthwhile exercise to try and defend the reductio further, it seemed easier to ask it to come up with a better one, with more robust premises. And so it did.

It first refined the premises so they “hold up more strongly under scrutiny from various moral theories,” and then examined them through the lens of each.

Improved Reductio:

  1. Premise 1: Israel claims to be the most moral army in the world.
  2. Premise 2: A key aspect of morality involves avoiding or minimizing harm, including death and injury, to innocents.
  3. Premise 3: A moral army, therefore, would aim to minimize harm to all civilians, including both their own and the enemy’s civilians, as much as possible (From 2).
  4. Premise 4: The identity of those spared death and injury should be considered secondary to the moral duty of minimizing harm to all civilians.
  5. Premise 5: The actions of the Israeli army in freeing 4 Israelis led to the death of over 100 Palestinian civilians and injury to hundreds more.
  6. Conclusion: Therefore, if the Israeli army’s actions result in a high number of civilian casualties and injuries, it contradicts the claim of being the most moral army, according to the principle of minimizing harm.
This revised argument holds up better under scrutiny from various moral theories and provides a more solid basis for the reductio ad absurdum.

And one must agree.

Common Sense Will Do

However, we did not need the reductio to see the falsity of the Israeli claim. In truth, the inherent unreliability of Israel’s subjective claim to having the most moral army is by itself sufficient grounds to dismiss it as false. What do we think of a friend or acquaintance who considers themselves more moral than everyone else, and goes around saying so? Self-declared claims to any kind of virtue, especially moral heights, should always raise loud alarm bells.

And Just to Make Sure…

Even so, should the common sense approach leave us wanting, there is also a strong supporting philosophical and logical analysis to further roundly refute this preposterous and quite pernicious Israeli hasbara. Under the guise of morality, Israel massacred scores of innocent people in just this latest atrocity, not to mention slaughtered nearly 40,000 Palestinians since Hamas massacred 1,200 Israelis on October 7, 2023. Both acts are massacres and vile in the eyes of anyone striving to be an enlightened, modern individual wishing to get on well with everyone on this fragile planet. Yet one is moved to call out the Israeli gall in claiming it holds the moral high ground when it can be argued very convincingly that it holds less than Hamas. As one might note also of the entire Zionist enterprise, Israel may have the land, but the moral high ground will forever elude it.

In Russia They Rig Elections. In America They Buy Them

Whilst Russia strong arms voters and fiddles results, in America mega-donors simply buy candidates before they are elected. The sale of American politicians has already proved disastrous for Palestinians.

Global political landscapes differ vastly in the methods used to influence election outcomes. While Russia has gained notoriety for its blatant election rigging, the United States employs a subtler yet equally effective approach: the buying of elections through substantial financial influence. This phenomenon is especially evident in the context of former President Donald Trump’s campaigns, as illustrated by significant donations from influential figures the likes of Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, two people long associated with the Israel lobby.

The Russian Approach: Election Rigging

Russia’s interference in both its own and other nations’ elections is well-documented. The Russian government utilizes media manipulation, cyber-attacks, and direct vote tampering to achieve favorable outcomes. The 2020 U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment confirmed Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 and 2020 U.S. elections, aiming to undermine public faith in the democratic process. Domestically, Russia’s government exerts control over media and uses state resources to secure the election of preferred candidates (Yahoo)​​ (Politico).

The American Way: Buying Elections

In contrast, the United States witnesses massive financial contributions shaping electoral outcomes. Legal yet controversial, this process raises questions about the integrity and fairness of American democracy. Campaigns require vast amounts of money, leading candidates to cater to the interests of wealthy donors and super PACs (political action committee), potentially sidelining the general electorate.

The Trump Campaign’s Financial Struggles

Former President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign highlights the critical role of money in American politics. Despite previous fundraising success, Trump now faces a financial crunch. His campaign raised only $13.8 million in January 2024 while spending more than that amount, driven by escalating legal fees from numerous court cases. This financial strain has made potential donors wary, as they are reluctant to fund a campaign overshadowed by legal controversies (Politico)​.

Adding to Trump’s woes, his main rival, Nikki Haley, has outperformed him in fundraising, collecting nearly $3 million more than Trump’s primary campaign committee in recent months . The diminished cash flow underscores the challenges even a high-profile candidate like Trump faces in maintaining donor enthusiasm without guaranteed returns.

Sheldon Adelson’s Influence

The influence of major donors on U.S. elections is exemplified by Sheldon Adelson’s contributions. In 2016, Adelson donated $20 million to Trump’s campaign with the expectation that Trump would move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Trump fulfilled this promise in 2018, a move that garnered widespread international condemnation and significantly impacted U.S.-Israel relations .

Miriam Adelson’s Current Stipulations

Following Sheldon Adelson’s death, his widow Miriam Adelson continues to wield considerable influence. She has touted the possibility of a large donation to Trump’s 2024 campaign, but with a significant condition: Trump must support the annexation of the West Bank by Israel. The West Bank has been illegally occupied and colonized by Israel since it invaded that part of Palestine in 1967. Together with the Adelson’s success in transferring the US Embassy to Jerusalem, in violation of international law, this latest demand by Miriam Adelson in return for finance highlights the transactional nature of political donations and the substantial influence donors have on policy decisions.

Big Donors and Their Conditions

Despite early financial difficulties, Trump’s fundraising picked up in the first quarter of 2024, largely due to the support of major Republican donors. Trump’s joint fundraising committee raised $65 million, although this amount still falls short compared to President Joe Biden’s formidable fundraising efforts ​(Politico)​.The reliance on large donors comes with strings attached, influencing campaign strategies and policy priorities, thus potentially skewing the democratic process towards the interests of a wealthy few and, notably, Israel, rather than towards the broader population.

Disastrous Consequences for Palestinians

The political influence exerted by donors like the Adelsons has had significant repercussions, particularly for Palestinians. The move of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and potential support for the annexation of the West Bank exacerbates tensions in the region and undermines the prospects for peace. This is to state matters mildly, however. The full potential of such influence is for the creation of a Greater Israel, in which the presence of Palestinians becomes even more precarious that it already is. This raises the spectre of mass killing, ethnic cleansing and expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland on a scale not seen even during the Nakba’s of 1948 and 1967, or even in the current genocide in Gaza. (Democracy Now!)

Should Trump be elected on Adelson’s money and Israel annex the West Bank, not only will American voters be robbed of their right to choose who leads them, the way will be open for Israel to commit its final crime against humanity in an effort to create a pure Jewish state.

Sources

  1. NY1. Trump faces financial crunch in 2024 campaign. NY1
  2. Politico. Trump fundraising picks up, with help from big donors. Politico
  3. U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment. Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections. Intelligence Community Assessment
  4. BBC News. Trump moves US embassy to Jerusalem. BBC
  5. The New York Times. Sheldon Adelson, Mega-Donor to GOP and Israel, Is Dead at 87. NYT
  6. The Times of Israel. Miriam Adelson hints at further political donations. Times of Israel
  7. Haaretz. Trump is desperate for cash, but donors have conditions. Haaretz
  8. Democracy Now!: “A Textbook Case of Genocide”: Israeli Holocaust Scholar Raz Segal Decries Israel’s Assault on Gaza. Democracy Now!

Article Information

This articles is an edited version of text generated by ChatGPT. It was edited and approved by a human editor.

Initial prompt:
– Write a blog piece based on the title: “In Russia they rig elections. In America they buy them.” Reference this article for starter information: Trump is desperate for cash, but donors have conditions. Haaretz. –

Just Another Family

The Netanyahu family on a day trip to the (occupied) Golan in Syria, 2019. (Source: Times of Israel)

A run-of-the-mill picture of a family in the Golan, known internationally as the Golan Heights? The area is part of Syria, but has been illegally occupied and settled by Israelis since Israel’s 1967 attack on Syria and other neighboring Arab states, also known as the Six Day War. Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights in 1981 is not recognized by the United Nations and the international community. Only the United States, during the 2016-20 presidency of Donald Trump, has recognized Israel’s illegal claim over the territory.

If one did not know who and where they were, one might think them an ordinary, middle-of-the-road family enjoying a ramble in the countryside, and that the father is perhaps a teacher and not a person of interest to the International Criminal Court (ICC) regarding war crimes. But that is precisely what Benjamin Netanyahu is. As of late May 2024, the ICC has applied for arrest warrants for both Netanyahu and his defence minister Yoav Gallant, along with three Hamas commanders, for war crimes committed during Israel’s assault on Gaza and the attack on Israel by Hamas in October 2023.

You might also not suspect that both the father and mother are embroiled in state level corruption charges, with possible jail time if proven. Or that one son, Yair, who the Times of Israel calls a “spoiled dauphin”, is known “for his far-right views and combative social media presence, which has landed him in court on a number of occasions.” (It is somewhat apt he is pictured on the far right in the image above). He has also been “sued multiple times and ordered to pay out hundreds of thousands of shekels in compensation”. And according to the Jerusalem Post, a right wing Israeli publication, Yair also called Israeli “democracy” demonstrators terrorists and Nazis.

Otherwise they look like a nice family.

Face of Israel Mirrors Its Nefarious Heart of Zionism

Haaretz regularly and boldly runs articles that report the truth about Apartheid Israel.

A New Low: The Israelis Advocating to Starve the People of Gaza

An Orgy of Jewish Supremacy and Antidemocratic Euphoria, Encouraged by Netanyahu

Netanyahu’s Silence Is Paving the Way to Israel’s Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza

Ethnic Cleansing in God’s Name: The Only Israelis With a Plan for the ‘Day After’ in Gaza

These articles and countless more require few words to summarize what they describe. Only evil, hate filled, murderous, and racist can capture these intentions, voiced not only on the streets of the Apartheid state but at the very core of its governing regime.

Today, such words describing the nature of Israel will be viewed by most as extreme. Tomorrow, in a future that is sane, they will be seen as truth by everyone. Why did we not see the truth back then?

Fortunately, though they are still few in numbers, there are some who do see the truth today, courageously calling it out loud and clear. In a report in Haaretz, Israeli activist Netta Ben Porat uses the word as she recounts how she and other Israelis physically use their bodies to protect Palestinians from settler violence and ethnic cleansing:

“In 2021, I joined a group of people who were escorting shepherds in the West Bank. Two settlers on motorcycles showed up and drove through the flock to scare the sheep. I was stunned, I simply couldn’t believe it. Today something like that is almost amusing – it’s nothing. But the evil simply shocked me. After a little while, I began to go there once a week.”

If Ben Porat felt a mere terrorism with motorcycles was evil, what word can describe what we see today, and also what is intended in the headlines above?

The word evil appears four times on the article page in Haaretz: used once by Ben Porat in the article itself, and 3 times in the comments section by three different commenters. The word is unavoidable when witnessing what is being committed against Palestinians. It pops into the mind involuntarily and ineluctably, coming to consciousness unbidden, as easily and irrefutably as does the answer to 2+2. It is time to see the evil and name it for what it is.

In November of 2021, whilst harvesting olives with Palestinian farmers, Ben Porat was viciously attacked with a club spiked with a nail, wielded by a settler youth. She bled profusely and required several stitches to her head. She has been attacked many times since, and beaten on occasion by Israeli police. Haaretz asked why she continues her activism:

“I truly feel terrible guilt. In the name of my security, we are inflicting terrible wrongs on innocent people, simple people. We are destroying communities. Almost everyone I accompanied no longer lives in the place where I was with them. We are destroying an entire culture systematically and rapidly – finishing people off. And I am funding it. I earn a lot of money, and this is what the taxes I pay are doing. Everyone is mobilized for this purpose: the police, the soldiers, the judicial system, the state prosecution and the judges. This is the country. This is me.”

This is the country. This is Apartheid Israel. Clearly Ben Porat does not want to be part of it. “We are few and we are standing against the State of Israel. But I can’t do otherwise,” says Ben Porat. “I don’t do it out of pity or because I love Palestinians. I do it because it’s hard for me to accept what we [Israelis] are doing – it’s hard for me to accept what has become of us.”

This and many other testimonies remind us that it is not Jews who are calling for the massacre of a people whose Homeland was stolen in their name. The chilling eliminationist rhetoric and attempted extermination of Palestinians through occupation, bombing, starvation, exposure and disease come straight from the ideological heart of Israel, set beating 77 years ago by its Zionist founders. It is they, along with the Zionists who govern the Apartheid state today, and the Israeli citizens and violent settlers who support them, as well as the Israel-Zionist lobby in the USA, who alone are guilty of these crimes against humanity.

Jews all over the world must not allow the willful evil we see before us to sully their name. They must courageously raise their voice, joining those among them already raising their voices and denouncing Israel and Zionism, in some cases risking their lives as with Ben Porat. Jews as a collective must re-awaken to their ancient tradition of humanity and compassionate being, before their name is irrevocably smeared with the guilt of those who use it to justify such heartless crimes. That would be a disaster for Jews and Judaism, confirming in the minds of those who hate Jews that they were right all along.

The message should be made clear: Zionism is not Judaism, though it has tried very hard to make us believe that it is.

“We came to Israel, we left from Palestine.”

Israelism, a documentary by two young American Jews raised to unconditionally love Israel, shows how other young Jews similarly indoctrinated are waking up to the reality of the Apartheid State.

Screenings: https://www.israelismfilm.com/screenings

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9636732/?ref_=vp_close

For Sale in Gaza

Israelis, to steal our land,

You need kill not us alone, but your humanity.

Before you flatten our olives,

Crush our houses,

Shred our bodies,

You must first shred every strand of decency,

Flatten every tower of compassion,

Smoother every voice of reason.

And then,

Cleansed, Cleared, Colonised,

The Three Cs of Israel stamped on Gaza,

Aside the shimmering Sea ahead and bright,

A compassionless wilderness stretching before you,

In your villas overlooking,

As beneath our bodies lie.

You may take our land, or keep your humanity.

But both, that is denied you.

Israeli President Herzog’s Lesson on Neighbourliness

Speaking at the Jan 2024 World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, President Herzog of Israel stated that he wanted a better future for the Palestinians, who, he said, “are our neighbours”.

One must admit that Israel appears to be doing its level best in fulfilling this aspiration. It has only killed 25,000 of its neighbours in the last three months. As we have been told on numerous occasions, the death toll could be much worse if Israel, who has the world’s most moral army, did not observe the rules of war, among which are the principle of proportionate response and the safeguarding of civilians.

Well done Israel and President Herzog. It is clear that far from relating to your neighbours with “polite indifference”, as the Zionist Ze’ev Jabotinsky advised in his settler-colonial blueprint The Iron Wall, you are in fact going the extra mile and “showering” Palestinians with your particular brand of neighbourliness.

In an affectionate personal touch, President Herzog also signed an artillery shell before it was fired at his neighbours. With such attention and thoughtfulness to detail, who would not want Israel as neighbour?

Israel, the Ultimate in Wind-up Gadgetry

There are two kinds of states: those that need propping up lest they collapse, and those that are self-perpetuating.

For the majority of history up until roughly the Second World War, the division of the Earth’s surface into recognised states (or kingdoms and empires as they were better known prior to the concept of the modern state) was fluid. Kingdoms came and went, empires rose and fell, with only a relatively few managing to survive for centuries and in rare cases millennia.

Not until we reach medieval times do we see the first signs of long-term stability, and not until after the industrial revolution does that stability gather force and become more widespread. And the aftermaths of both World Wars see the creation of many more independent states, many in the Middle and Far east, such as Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Israel and Pakistan.

In our modern era of a well established and more or less stable geographical division of the Earth’s surface into nation states, the self-perpetuating state is by far the overwhelming variety. There have been a few cases in modern times when countries – for example, Rhodesia and Somaliland – have gone bust so to speak, to vanish forever off the face of the Earth (with a resulting increase in the worth of their postage stamps). But, generally, the roughly 200 odd countries that currently exist have been around a while, and most do not look likely to be going anywhere soon. Most importantly, few have their legitimacy in question (which is to skate over the argument that many, if not all states are illegitimate, since the concept of statehood is arguably invalid), and few among them face any serious challenge to their continuation. There are disputes a-plenty, with political wrangles and physical skirmishes over bits of territory deemed to belong to one or other state. But essentially, more or less, the country map of the world is not likely to change much in future.

However, though much change in the global map is unlikely, some change is quite likely. China may reclaim Taiwan (quite likely), Russia may subsume Ukraine once more (not so likely), the Greek Cypriots may succeed in shaking off Turkey’s hold (who knows), and Israel may implode (a near certainty.)

Of course, here we are interested only in the Apartheid state of Israel, which has existed for less than a century yet has managed to keep an entire region profitably at war for all of that time.

And therein lies the key to Israel’s future. As long as Israel is profitable, it will survive. The question to ask, however, is profitable for whom? The answer is of course obvious, which is the countries that use Israel as a means to interfere in the region, as well as the Israeli and Zionist elites that gain power and wealth through Israel’s existence. Israel’s existence would not have come about had the interest in imposing it on the region was simply the safety of Jews. In the minds of those who paved the way – namely, Britain and later the USA, there were greater interests than helping Jews who, let us remember, the West had not stopped persecuting for thousands of years. Britain “viewed with favour the creation of a Jewish state” because 1) many in Britain wished rid of their Jews, and 2) the Zionists made it abundantly clear they would “kick-back” benefits to Britain, which at that time was beginning to take a leading role in controlling Middle East oil. Later, the USA would take on the role of supporting Israel once its existence had been imposed on the region in 1947, and till today American tax dollars lavish tens of billions in finance, military hardware, and munitions on the Apartheid state. This is not to mention the potent political leverage that the USA exercises on behalf of Israel, vetoing UN resolutions that could help Palestinians escape persecution and occupation, and protecting Israeli officials from criminal prosecution at the International Court of Justice.

The long and short of the argument here – which is by no means scientific or scholarly, but nonetheless rests intuitively on the strong evidence we daily see before us – is that Israel is propped up. Without the aid, military support, exceptionalism, and protection from criminal prosecution, to say nothing of the deference to powerful Zionist interests and fear of being called an antisemite should anyone dare to criticise, Israel continues, like a wind-up clock, sustained by the hands that turn the crank. To the West it is a tool, an instrument, a gadget of regional control, and should those hands tire or find something more profitable to prop-up, or, heaven forbid, develop a conscience, Israel is left not just high and dry but winding down. It cannot sustain itself no matter how smart its tech industry, no matter how clever its academics and corporate leaders. The Israeli Apartheid regime knows this, and it is why it has sought alliances with Arab states, in particular with the fellow oppressive regime in Saudi Arabia. If it could normalise permanently with the wider Arab world whilst completely marginalising the Palestinians, its future is better assured, especially as the West grows tired of propping up and apologising for its criminality.

As Western interests in the region wane over the coming decades, and their complicity and support wind down, without strong regional alliances the Zionist state is doomed (Jews, however, are not, let us be clear on that). This is why, whatever you might think of it, the attack on October 7 was a logical move for Hamas. What will come of it in the short term is not important. Even if Israel manages to resuscitate the so-called Abraham Accords which began to normalise relations with Arab states, in the long-term Israel has been exposed for what it is – a genocidal apartheid state – and no amount of alliances will protect it from that. We saw what happened to the vicious apartheid regime in South Africa. In today’s world, even with all its flaws and injustices and conflicts, apartheid and “on-air genocide” are unsustainable.

Is Israel a Nazi State?

By Hypothetical News reporter, Ifit Wereso

Is Israel Guilty Of Apartheid Against Palestinians?

The Coalition for Naming Injustice (CNI) has recently issued guidelines on how to respond to the guidelines on antisemitism issued by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). In its “working definition of antisemitism” (presumably designated as “working” such that, should these definitions be successfully shown as unfounded and politically motivated, it can be reviewed and amended without loss of face), the IHRA has advised, and some would argue all but decreed, that “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis” is antisemitic.

The CNI had this to say in a statement issued today with regard to the increasingly difficult task of trying to avoid comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany:

“We advise that, though it is difficult in the face of what we see being done to Palestinians by Israel, for the time being campaigners for justice for Palestinians should leave comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany to Israelis and Jews themselves, of which there are an increasing number (Israel’s Government Has neo-Nazi Ministers. It Really Does Recall Germany in 1933 ; Ex-IDF general likens military control of West Bank to Nazi Germany)

“We further advise that in order to avoid false accusation under the IHRA’s weaponised form of antisemitism, those campaigning against Israeli apartheid occupation, oppression, and genocide simply refer to Israel as a nasty state. Few who are familiar with justice will disagree this is an apt description of a state that, as Israeli journalist Gideon Levy says, “treats Palestinians like animals”. And that it is, as a result, a very nasty state indeed.

Gideon Levy at the National Press Club, speaking on the loss of hope in Israel’s behaviour

At the time of writing, nearly 20,000 Palestinians, among them 8000 children and 5000 women, have been murdered by the Israeli Offensive Forces in Gaza.