That's right you read it right, treat Israel like South Africa. You know for years, leftists and Arabs, and all kind of anti-Semites compared Israel to South Africa. Lately they've even begun urging investors to divest from Israel as was done against South Africa.

Many Jews shrugged off the comparison, or hid from it. And most decent people of all persuasions, argued, "No it's not true, Israel is a democracy, and South Africa has apartheid."

But it dawned on me tonight that the comparison makes some sense. Not between Israel - the embattled victim of morally degenerate suicide bombings - and the once racially segregated South Africa. Not between Israel, the victor in a defensive war - that pitted several enemies against it, attempting a second Holocaust in 1967 - and a cruel divisive South African regime that pitted one group against another for racial supremacy. But between Israel the country that since 1948, has wanted to live peacefully with its neighbors; between Israel who has won all the wars that were forced upon it and still made agreements to return territory captured - territory that gave it much needed strategic depth - in return for promises written on paper; and the new racially diverse South Africa of Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, and the current President Thabo Mbeki.

You see Nelson Mandela - winner of the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize - and Desmond Tutu - winner of the 1984 Nobel Peace Prize - called for reconciliation between groups in South Africa. After Mandela's release from 28 years of imprisonment in 1990, the first thing he DIDN'T do was call for killing whites. Being elected President in the first multi-racial election in South Africa in 1994, Mandela also knew how to step down after 5-years in office; instead of like Arafat - the infamous Nobel Peace Prize winner - who recently appointed puppet Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. Desmond Tutu has set up the Desmond Tutu Peace Centre. As opposed to what one envisions Yasser Arafat doing upon retirement, "The Yasser School of Safe Explosive's Use", maybe?

Here's the issue, current plans put forward by The Quartet - US, EU, UN and Russia - the so-called 'roadmap' to Middle East peace, envision the first case of 'Ethnic Cleansing' of the 21st century, this time internationally legitimated. I understand that if most countries would have favored the Nazi attempt to commit genocide against the Jews, or most of the world supported forced racial segregation - Apartheid - in South Africa, that would have made them OK to do. You don't agree? So why is it OK to close Jewish 'settlements', uproot several 100,000's Jews from Judea and Samaria - the West Bank - and Gaza, in the name of 'Peace', when the world is being promised an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and a democratic Palestinian State? Forget Apartheid, they're planning a racially-ethnically pure Arab state free of Jews!

If the 'Peace Plan' everyone envisions, requires uprooting whole communities; towns and villages of thousands, expelling families from their homes, destroying everything built - schools, community centers, businesses, people's lives - in the last 36 years, where may I ask is the reconciliation? Where is the Peace? When the blacks in South Africa finally gained power, they didn't throw the whites out, or try to murder them!

If 'Palestine' has to be 'Judenrein' - free of Jews - then it won't be democratic but NAZI!

'Palestine' won't be an Apartheid State, but a Nazi state, not racially supremist but racially pure. And that's a far cry from the vision being presented to us by all those nice people who say, "we have to solve the Palestinian problem" or "The solution is two states living side by side in peace". The Palestinian Authority till now has done little - some say nothing - to stop the Oslo Terror War for close to three years. Plenty evidence indicates they've actually helped carry it out. The expressed purpose of the terror groups is to drive Jews out of their homes. But Jews have a longer history - almost 4,000 years - with these ancient Holy Places - Hebron, Shechem, Bethlehem, Shilo, Tekoa, Elon More, Jericho as the indigenous population - than the Arabs do. Most of whom came into the area from the surrounding Arab countries in the late 19th & early 20th centuries. Why should the Jews have to leave? If Arabs can be equal citizens in Israel, electable to the Knesset - parliament - why can't Jews be equal citizens in the democratic Palestinian state in the making, with full rights, responsibilities, and privileges?

The comparison between Israel and the old South Africa doesn't fly, but the comparison between the Palestinian state that they're trying to sell us, and the old racist South Africa goes quite well. On the other hand, the correct comparison is between Israel and the new multi-racial South Africa. The population of South Africa today is about 75% black, with the remainder made up of white, coloreds, and Indians. Israel's population is about 80% Jewish, with the remainder Arab, Druze, Bedouin, Circassian, Armenian, etc. Both are democracies with a dominant majority and minorities sharing equal rights.

The proposed Palestinian state will have an estimated population of between 2.4 and 2.9 million people, and almost 10% of the population is Jews. In Judea and Samaria - the West Bank - there are about 1.5 to 1.8 million Arabs and almost 250,000 Jews, or about 15%. When you include the post-1967 parts of Eastern Jerusalem; that brings the total number of Jews to about a half a million, or almost 20% of the proposed Palestinian state. So why exactly can't Jews stay in Palestine?

In Hebron for example, the media always tells you that there are 500 Jews living among 100,000 or 120,000 Arabs. BIG LIE! What they 'forget' to tell you is that the population figure for the Arabs, is for the greater metropolitan area of Hebron, surrounding villages - suburbs - and all, and if you include all the Jews living in the same areas - Kiryat Arba, and the Hebron Hills towns and villages - there are close to 10,000 Jews living there, or about 10% of the total population. Cities in Judea and Samaria like Ma'ale Adumim with almost 35,000 Jews and Ariel with 22,000 - the size of Anytown, USA - they're going to be expelled?

Why can't all these Jews stay living in Palestine, just as the non-Jews live in Israel? Real peace doesn't mean 'Ethnic Cleansing', real peace means reconciliation, respect, and mutual trust. If there aren't any of these, THERE ISN'T ANY REAL PEACE! So, why are the Jews being forced from their homes exactly?

Why does the world want to 'Ethnically Cleanse' Palestine of Jews? Why would the world voluntarily create - at best - another old South Africa - at worst - a Nazi Arab state? Does the world somehow have lower expectations from the Arabs? That Arabs somehow can't live peacefully among others? Does the world have racist attitudes that somehow Palestinians can't live in democratic societies and share? Or, does the world not care about persecuted Jews? Just like in the time of the Holocaust!

Where are all the 'Great Souls' of the world, morally outraged by a 'Peace Plan' that calls for the expulsion of people from their homes? Where are all the anti-apartheid activists, who saw such evil in the old South Africa? Why aren't they protesting this latest injustice? Why not divest from Palestine?

So, I challenge you Desmond. I dare you Nelson. Stand up for those high morals everyone has attributed to the two of you. Don't just sit back and watch as 100,000's of Jews get 'Ethnically Cleansed' from their ancient homeland. Remember Desmond the Land of Israel, Canaan or Judea, that place described in your Bible? Certainly men of such high moral fiber as yourselves, and all the others like you, will call out for 'understanding', and 'tolerance', and 'peace' and 'reconciliation', between Arab and Jew in a democratic Palestine. And certainly, you will all oppose expelling people from their homes, even if they are only Jews!

Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko

(c) 2003/5763 Pasko

Its about Judaism and Islam. On one hand, you have the peaceful and inclusive religion of Judaism. You have a Jewish history of enslavement and persecution for reason of ethnicity, jealousy, and simply because of tradition. I am not Jewish, I am half-black, and some of the best friends that I have are Jewish.

Islam, on the other hand, is a violent and oppressive religion. Upon becoming a Muslin, you LOSE your freedom to express your individuality. You have a history covered in blood, thievery, polygamy and murder.

Israel is the sole democracy in the Middle East, and frankly, I wouldnt feel uncomfortable at all if they took over the ENTIRE Middle East, just to stem the growth of Islam. Naw....I would rather let things go as they are going now: Let the United States continue to occupy the Middle East until it is completely under control. The result will STILL be stemming the growth the Islam.

Once again, the GOID MYTH leads to suffering and misery. The Earth will not know peace until religion is done away with....

Religion and Secular government cannot co-exist. Its like the era when there were gas-driven automobiles and horse drawn carriages on the same streets at the same time.

I can answer Mr. Pasko's question:

"Why should the Jews have to leave?"

If they don't, they'll be murdered.

"Jewboy"

by daveman • Friday June 27, 2003 08:24 AM



Shut the fuck up and go rent out your nose for billboard space.

Daveman didn't post that.

...you paranoid lunatic.

...The blacks of South Africa are still living impoverished and the whites still have all the best land and resources. Nelson Mandela didn't do a damn thing to improve the lives of indigenous South Africans. Ending Apartheid just cleared whites consious while continuing to rape Africa blind.

Actually, the blacks are under control. And not doing the greatest job in managing the economy. This is why the white South Africans are emigrating in droves.

The concept of White flight makes no sense in a rich country whose majority population is black. Your comment did not address what I actually said, especially the point about whites still holding onto the best land and resources and raping Africa blind. What is privitization but a modern form of imperialism. And if I'm not mistaken I explicitly said that Nelson Mandela did nothing to improve the lives of his people. So what's your angle?

"Jewboy" knows I am an ardent supporter of Israel.

You faking both me and him is really rather childish, don't you think?

Of course, if you stopped the childish behaviour, you'd have nothing left at all.

"White flight = White theft"

Clearly you are suggesting something along the lines of what is happening in Zimbabwae (mugabe's reversal of colonialism) Also if you haven't noticed his policies are an abysmal failure.

by the way do you own some land? I dont own any at the moment and I hear you are the sharing type.

Here's his email address:

scott@compnla.com

I'm all for letting jewish settlers remain in their current homes.

but to be fair then, palestinians should be allowed to return to their former homes right?

the problem is israelis want a jewish state. period. and the arabs dont want to deal with jews

so initially, two racially or religiously pure states is the only possible solution

Your anti-semitism is not amusing.

"Clearly you are suggesting something along the lines of what is happening in Zimbabwae (mugabe's reversal of colonialism) Also if you haven't noticed his policies are an abysmal failure. by the way do you own some land? I dont own any at the moment and I hear you are the sharing type."

It is always amusing when someone has gawl to write that it is clear what I am suggesting, especially while actively ignoring most of what I said. The leaps and bounds you made is exactly that, your own mental leaps and bounds. Perhaps you did not quite understand my message. That's why you wrote that silliness about me sharing land. I don't own any land in Africa. And I certainly don't own any farms, ore and precious metal mines, water reserves or power generators that have been in the process of "foreign" privatization sense most African nations gained independce. Now if you want to actually address what I wrote, I will be more than happy to engage. Otherwise, don't bore me with trite comebacks about Mugabes failing to reverse hundreds of years of global systemic colonization.

"Trite comebacks" are all I have, as logic escapes me. I'm a conservative.

"two racially or religiously pure states is the only possible solution"

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY...ARE YOU ADVOCATING THE EXPULSION OF ARABS FROM ISRAEL TOO? OR ONLY THE EXPULSION OF JEWS FROM PALESTINE?

" I don't own any land in Africa."

I mean any land anywhere.... There is no reason why your problem with some races owning valuable land (yeap white people are just like children of the corn) should only apply to africa now is there?

you were saying that

"whites [are] still holding onto the best land" as if that is by definition a bad thing.

Why are you percieving of "whites" as a group who are "not supposed to own more land than others?"

If you are proposing to solve that problem then by definition you are planning on (in some form) going and taking land from white people and giving it to black people like mugabe did.

Now in zimbabwae that resulted in starvation.

"Otherwise, don't bore me with trite comebacks about Mugabes failing to reverse hundreds of years of global systemic colonization."

Oh no he is reversing it jsut fine. the only problem is that is a bad thing.

>>I don't own any land in Africa."

"I mean any land anywhere.... There is no reason why your problem with some races owning valuable land...should only apply to africa now is there?"

So you want to continue with this silliness, huh? (BTW, I like how you generalized the discussion to "some races", thereby creating an infinite number of imaginary examples that would be impossible debate.) But sure, find some valuable land in, say Europe, that Africans stole, raped and plundered but are still living there comfortably today and I'll welcome you into my humble home.

"you were saying that 'whites [are] still holding onto the best land' as if that is by definition a bad thing."

How they got and maintained possession of that land (through colonialism/imperialism, i.e. theft at gunpoint) is "bad". Again, you are making it a habit of imagining what I mean while ignoring what I am saying, like beginning with "you were saying that...as if..." What follows "as if" has nthing to do with what I said and thus irrelevent to the discussion.

"Why are you percieving of 'whites' as a group who are "not supposed to own more land than others?"

What are you talking about? Whites as a group are less than 5% of the earth's population, but control over 90% of the earth's resources.

"If you are proposing to solve that problem then by definition you are planning on (in some form) going and taking land from white people and giving it to black people like mugabe did.

Now in zimbabwae that resulted in starvation."

So you are suggesting that we DON'T solve "that problem" (where black people are impoverished and starving) because it will result in black people starving? Ha! You're funny. You almost made me forget that this is a diversion from the original point I made (that you won't touch with a ten foot pole) which is that whites individually and as nations are raping Africa blind.

Is that a "bad thing"?