ga('send', 'pageview');
John Passant

Site menu:

March 2015
« Feb   Apr »



RSS Oz House



Subscribe to us

Get new blog posts delivered to your inbox.


Site search


Keep socialist blog En Passant going - donate now
If you want to keep a blog that makes the arguments every day against the ravages of capitalism going and keeps alive the flame of democracy and community, make a donation to help cover my costs. And of course keep reading the blog. To donate click here. Keep socialist blog En Passant going. More... (4)

Sprouting sh*t for almost nothing
You can prove my 2 ex-comrades wrong by donating to my blog En Passant at BSB: 062914 Account: 1067 5257, the Commonwealth Bank in Tuggeranong, ACT. More... (12)

My interview Razor Sharp 18 February
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace on Razor Sharp on Tuesday 18 February. (0)

My interview Razor Sharp 11 February 2014
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace on Razor Sharp this morning. The Royal Commission, car industry and age of entitlement get a lot of the coverage. (0)

Razor Sharp 4 February 2014
Me on 4 February 2014 on Razor Sharp with Sharon Firebrace. (0)

Time for a House Un-Australian Activities Committee?
Tony Abbott thinks the Australian Broadcasting Corporation is Un-Australian. I am looking forward to his government setting up the House Un-Australian Activities Committee. (1)

Make Gina Rinehart work for her dole

Sick kids and paying upfront


Save Medicare

Demonstrate in defence of Medicare at Sydney Town Hall 1 pm Saturday 4 January (0)

Me on Razor Sharp this morning
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace this morning for Razor Sharp. It happens every Tuesday. (0)



Michael Brull in New Matilda on what really happened at Sydney University – the lies of the Zionists exposed, again

Michael Brull in New Matilda has written a devastating response to the lies of the Zionists about the protest against Israeli war crimes and genocide at Sydney University on 11 March. Unlike the apologists for Zionist murder and dispossession Brull presents the facts based on videos of the event.  The protesters were the victims of violence, not its instigators or perpetrators.

He says in part:

When you consider that Colonel Kemp has distinguished himself in his defence of Israeli massacres, this becomes deeply enlightening. If anyone was aggressive in this story, it is those who used violence – the security guards, who used it as a first resort, and the woman who assaulted Lynch, and perhaps his wife too.

The real story here is yet another attempt to smear opponents of Israeli massacres as anti-Semites, and the ongoing campaign to destroy Jake Lynch’s career for his principled opposition to how Israel treats the Palestinians.

The facts are all there about what happened – you can watch the videos yourself.

Whether the factual records makes any difference, well, we will soon find out.

Click on this link to read Brull’s article Blaming The Victims: What Really Happened At The Colonel Kemp USyd Protest in full in New Matilda.



Comment from Dire
Time March 18, 2015 at 11:00 am

An interesting aside to this article. The counting in the Israeli election shows Arab Joint List with a possible 13 seats and they may be able to block Likud forming government.

I have, in the past, seen others take issue with your use of the term apartheid to describe Israel. In South Africa, as you well know, non-whites could not vote in elections. This is also true in countries like Saudi Arabia and indeed Hamas do not allow certain people to vote either.

And yet, here we see the Arab vote deciding the Israeli election. I’m sure, if they do hold balance of power, the BDS movement would be true to their cause and seek to ban these members of the Knesset from speaking in Australia, as they would be members of the oppressive Israeli Government.

I am not trolling here John, but I wonder if you can name a single country in the Middle East that has a block of athiest, Christian, B’Hai or Jewish MPs that are freely elected?

Pretty hard to run an apartheid line when the people you suggest are excluded from democratic rights are actually deciding the outcome of a democratic election. You’ll note too how almost 1 million Arab Israelis voted in the general election.

Comment from John
Time March 18, 2015 at 12:17 pm

Apartheid isn’t about exclusion from voting. It is exclusion from power and influence. Actually never once I understand has an Israeli Palestinian been a member of the cabinet. The benefits of state spending go overwhelmingly to the Jewish citizens of Israel at the expense of Palestinian Israelis. None of those in the Occupied Territories have the vote in the real administration that rules over them, brutalises them and drives them off their land. Gaza cannnot determine its future at all because it is a concentration camp run by the Israeli state. Gaza and the West Bank are Bantustans. All of that supports the conclusion Israel is an apartheid state.

Comment from John
Time March 18, 2015 at 12:35 pm

My friend Sol Salbe posted this recently on facebook about the vote ( 1 pm AEST). The Joint List is very unlikely to have any say in the make up of the government.

92.5 per cent [of the vote counted]

29 Likud
24 Zionist Camp
13 Joint list
11 Yesh Atid
9 Kulanu
8 Jewish Home
7 Shas
7 Yisrael Beitenu
7 United torah Judaism
5 Meretz

There are a few parties that round off and surplus arrangement could benefit and therefore affect the result by one up or down. This rough and ready as I expected to read this in the media and didn’t program a full spread sheet for it

Comment from Dire
Time March 18, 2015 at 1:42 pm

Can I follow up with your point that apartheid is about exlusion from power and influence. Well, is actually about exclusion from kep aspects of socirty, like the right to assemble, vote, participate equally, receive equal wages and so on.

I would then reckon that most Middle East countries are apartheid – they ban unions, exclude homosexuals, deny women’s rights, do not allow different religious parties to contest elections, restrict movement and suppress workers.

Do you agree that places like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Egypt, Lybia and others fit this desciption?

Comment from John
Time March 18, 2015 at 7:39 pm

No, two different issues. The US supported and other regimes in the Middle East are dictatorships, not apartheid regimes. The position is clear – the Palestinians, the majority in Palestine – are denied power etc because they are Palestinians. Israel is a colonial settler state like Australia, and South Africa. The South African regime attempted to create a system of Bantustans which would give them both a supply of cheap labour and a majority if possible in their areas. Similarly with Israel. People like Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and the South African trade union movement, all of whom might just know a thing or too about apartheid, all have described Israel as an apartheid regime.

The Arab Spring had the potential to sweep away the dictatorships in the region but while the masses knew what they opposed in many countries they didn’t know what they wanted in any real united sense. Those who half make a revolution dig their own grave.

Take Bahrain. The Sunni king rules over a Shia majority who his small leadership group have suppressed. Saudi Arabia helped in that suppression because its eastern province is majority Shia from memory. The US bases in Bahrain are so strategic that the US supports the repression and the rule of the dictatorship. No one has any rights in these countries by and large. The regimes suppress them all or favour economically some from particular areas. This is not apartheid.

Comment from John
Time March 19, 2015 at 5:12 am

Dire, this image captures well the argument about exclusion.

Comment from Dire
Time March 19, 2015 at 7:12 am

John, I take on board your distinctions, but equally what Iraq did to the Kurdish people is a form of apartheid – it denied them power, resources, freedom of movement, democracy and so on. The Jordanians also suppressed the Palestinian people. They denied them self determination during their occupation and refused a state, so I see that as the same as what Israel does. The Egyptians blockade Gaza and have the same restrictions on goods, movement of people, gas supplies etc – so again, this is the same tactic as Israel.

The Arab Spring, as you say, was just one dictatorship overthrowing another. The people got nothing from it but death and violence.

What I do want to point out is that the Israeli election attracts so much world media and this is because it is a democratic election.

Can anyone show similar coverage of elections in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, UAE, Iran etc that are open to world coverage and scrutiny? no, because they are not free elections, they are dictatorships that suppress certain people. Look at the B’Hai people in Iran – now that is apartheid!

Lastly, South Africa isn’t a good example. The ANC rules like a dictatorship everywhere bar the Cape. It is a corrupt, oppressive regime run by the military wing. I would hardly cite them as an example of free and fair government.