Icana.ir
PrintLogoPrintPrintLogo/Print With Image SendToFriendSend To Friends Whatsapp google_plus Line twitter

Farcical Hallucinations of Netanyahu

Service :
TEHRAN, May 25 (ICANA) – If you haven't listened to Benjamin Netanyahu's address to the US Congress on May 24, I'll tell you that you haven't lost something worthwhile. It was a farcical tirade devoid of any shred of sanity and full of hallucinatory and grotesque remarks.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:05:51 PM
Farcical Hallucinations of Netanyahu

Although almost every single sentence of Israeli Prime Minister's speech was followed by what the pro-Zionist media described as the "sustained applauds" and "extended applauds" of the US congressmen and congresswomen, this speech which can be described as a frantic effort to uphold Israel's descending legitimacy demonstrated that Tel Aviv is seriously suffering from an identity crisis and is facing the bitter consequences of its genocidal policies.

While the international community is stepping up pressure on the Israeli regime to withdraw from the occupied Palestinian territories and recognize the state of Palestine within the borders of 1967, Bibi Netanyahu made his second visit to the US during the presidency of Barack Obama to find a resolution for the unending problems of his country; a country which cannot survive without creating troubles for the world and disturbing its neighbors.

In the wake of the growing international anger at Israel, on the first anniversary of the massacre of 9 Turkish peace activist aboard the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, Netanyahu tried his best to distract the international attention from the numerous crises of Israel and his tough, behind-the-scenes altercation with President Obama who seems to have not served the Zionist lobby as perfectly as George W. Bush.

In his speech, Netanyahu made several attempts to make Israel look like a regular member of the international community such as the other countries of the world which are living together with peace, friendship and democracy, ironically the three concepts which Israel is fiercely at odds with.

He nonsensically confiscated the Arab uprising in the Middle East in favor of Israel and said that of 300 million Arabs living in the Middle East, "only Israel's Arab citizens enjoy real democratic rights."

Maybe the most ludicrous part of his speech was his boastful claim that the Arab nations of the region are trying to reach the level of democracy and freedom which the Zionist regime had already achieved, "courageous Arab protesters are now struggling to secure these very same rights for their peoples, for their societies. We're proud in Israel that over 1 million Arab citizens of Israel have been enjoying these rights for decades."

That makes an all-out and incontrovertible joke, "over 1 million Arab citizens of Israel have been enjoying these rights for decades."

Maybe, Bibi had better take a glance at what the world says about him and the artificial state which he represents. Even the closest friends of Israel such as Jimmy Carter have described Israel as an apartheid regime with features which are unquestionably similar to those who governed the South African Apartheid state between 1948 and 1994. Even the even-tempered critics of the Israeli regime believe that "a system of control" in the Israeli-occupied territories, including Jewish-only settlements, separate roads, military checkpoints, discriminatory marriage law, the West Bank barrier, use of Palestinians as cheap labor, inequities in infrastructure, legal rights and access to land and resources between Palestinians and Israeli residents in the Israeli-occupied territories resembles some aspects of the South African apartheid regime.

Not only journalists, political commentators and analysts but also politicians and officials of international organizations have likened Israeli regime to the South Africa's apartheid regime and testified that Tel Aviv treats the Palestinian citizens in a barbaric and savage manner.

In a 2007 report, United Nations Special Rapporteur for Palestine John Dugard stated that "elements of the Israeli occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law" and suggested that the "legal consequences of a prolonged occupation with features of colonialism and apartheid" be put to the International Court of Justice. Three years later in 2010 United Nations Special Rapporteur for Palestine Richard A. Falk reported that criminal apartheid features of the Israeli occupation had been entrenched in the three years since the report of his predecessor, John Dugard.

So, what makes Israel an apartheid regime? In 2003, the Israeli government announced a project of "fences and other physical obstacles" to prevent Palestinians crossing into Israel. Several figures, including the UK Member of Parliament Mohammad Sarwar, Australian journalist John Pilger, Palestinian politician Mustafa Barghouti and others have described the resultant West Bank barrier as an "apartheid wall."

In a 2008 report, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel concluded that a segregated road network in the West Bank, the expansion of Jewish settlements, the restriction of the growth of Palestinian towns and the discriminatory granting of services, budgets and access to natural resources are "a blatant violation of the principle of equality and in many ways reminiscent of the Apartheid regime in South Africa."

So, it's meaningless for such an entity as Israel to talk of democracy and human rights.

But the rest of Netanyahu's speech was more interesting! He talked of a growing "Iranian threat" and warned his applauding friends in the Congress to be alert about the nuclear-armed Iran, saying "when I last stood here, I spoke of the consequences of Iran developing nuclear weapons. Now time is running out. The hinge of history may soon turn, for the greatest danger of all could soon be upon us."

Was Netanyahu really joking, as he had been throughout his whole speech? It's not only ironic but bizarre and tragic that the representative of the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East has talked of a nuclear-armed Iran.

As confirmed by the Federation of American Scientists, Israel possesses up to 200 nuclear warheads and holds the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. So, isn't it senseless that Netanyahu has dared speak about a nuclear threat while his state poses the most serious threat to the international peace and security? What will happen if the insane politicians in the Israeli Knesset would approve dropping one of those tiny bombs on a sovereign country? What will happen if the more insane people such as Netanyahu authorize such a decision and carry it out?

Perhaps the Israeli Prime Minister has forgotten the fact that Iran does not need any permission to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, and that Iran has been the most peaceful and pacific country in the region which has not attacked nor invaded any country over the past 100 years. Bibi had better think of a solution for the reputation of his country which is internationally known as an occupier regime.

Overall, Netanyahu's speech to the US Congress was clearly indicative of the fact that Israel is facing major domestic and international problems; the most important of which is the legitimacy crisis. Tel Aviv is losing its friends around the world one after another, Hamas and Fatah as the largest political parties of Palestine have reached an agreement on establishing a national unity government, Egypt as the largest proponent of Israel in the Arab world has experienced a revolution which has turned the tide in favor of the Muslim nations and Palestine and the UN is taking practical steps for the recognition of a Palestinian state. Netanyahu is immensely afraid of these events which portray an inauspicious and horrendous prospect for the Zionist regime. (Press TV)

Member Comments
Full Name :
Email :
Body :

fa Icana

Copyright © Icana All Rights Reserved

Powerd By : Tasvirnet