Openly Racist Oath
By: Kian Mokhtari
Headlines have recently carried particularly bad news for human rights in the occupied Palestine. It appears that Jewish settlers have been setting fire to Palestinian owned olive groves in the West Bank. The act is called a "scorched earth" policy and we have been taught that it is one of the major crimes committed against human communities.
The siege of Gaza by Israel has been compared to the Nazi siege of the Warsaw Ghetto during WWII on many occasions by human rights observers. And what's worse is that the war on the tiny overcrowded enclave has also been said to have parallels to the brutality witnessed during the Nazi blitz against the residents of Warsaw's Jewish Ghetto.
The latest demand by Tel Aviv for an oath of loyalty to Israel as a "Jewish state" is also believed to be an openly racist act by rights groups. The infamous parallel being the oath of loyalty to the Third Reich imposed on the German rank and file by the Nazis. In the event Germany's Luftwaffe refused to swear an oath and since Hitler needed an air force the Nazi Party's Gestapo secret police turned a blind eye.
So does the term racist only apply when there are atrocities committed against one particular group of people in this world?
Denial of pastures to the "heathen" Native Americans finished them off to make way for Jewish-Christian European settlers. The strange thing is that all monotheist religions preach tolerance and say that a person's beliefs, race, creed and color cannot form the basis for discrimination. As a matter of fact nothing can justify discrimination of any kind because discrimination is a negative act by definition.
And yet we are getting very confused here because we are told that a Caucasian or African racist is wrong but a Jewish racist is right. In the US during the 1970s, it was as a big taboo to be a member of the Pan African "Black Panthers" -because their ideology was essentially racist.
So nobody dares be a racist other than the boys and girls in Tel Aviv and their little helpers abroad.
That is a very odd rule of thumb!
In fact a thumb has to be very crooked indeed to cater for the contradictory rules that have been drummed into us since childhood by our caring Western brothers.
Then there is the "look after number one" rule. It says that no matter what, you have to look after yourself and your own first to be able to do any good in this world. It is also a rule that the Arab governments keep overlooking with regards to Palestine. Now forgive us for attempting to stereotype Palestinians as Arabs but if they are Arabs as we are told, why is it that Arab League meeting after Arab League meeting has failed to do anything to assist the downtrodden population living under Israeli occupation?
So "look after number one" also does not apply to anyone outside of the Zionist theosophy. "ROIIIIGHT" said Doctor Evil to No.2…
There is another rule called the rule of the jungle –not be confused with Disney's "Junglebook" animation. The rule says that basically there are no rules other than the survival of the fittest. Now this latter rule appears to apply most realistically to the world we live in. And if that is the case why should anyone want an expensive, oversized and corrupt world body with a charter full of inspirational words that are completely void of meaning, when it comes to its overpriced actions?
The world on its current course, is heading toward a very unpleasant eventuality. Let us hope that such an eventuality is not essentially called "the reality"
"You may say I'm a dreamer; but I'm not the only one." John Lennon